Miami archdiocese bans Legionaries of Christ, Regnum Christi [CWN]

[S_Eewald]

The issue is very simple. When it comes to bishops and diocesan priests, those of us who are religious have always been taught by our founders that we are nothing in their presence. They are our masters and we are their servants. They command and we obey. If a bishop says that we leave, we leave. Please DO NOT DEFEND US FROM CHURCH AUTHORITIES. We religious who are faithful to what it means to be a religious, do not want to be defended. We know what we are. We are sons and daughters of the Church. We have very few rights and we like it that way. That’s what Christ called us to live.

As St. Francis said in our rule, “The bishops are right even when you think they are wrong.” They are right by virtue of their office. Meaning that they are always within their rights as long as they are in communion with the pope and follow canon law. They may be kicking us out because they don’t like the color of our hair or the fact that we pray too much, etc. But Canon Law allows them to do so. Therefore, they are right and we must leave without protesting, without asking questions, without expressing any opnions.

A religious man does not have opnions, feelings or questions unless they are allowed by those who are superior to him or by his constitution. It’s that simple. And we would like the laity to respect that and follow suit in matters that involve us.

What I’m getting in this thread is the laithy, not the Legion, questioning the legitimate decision of a bishop concerning a religious community. The only agent with authority to ask questions or call into doubt the actions of the bishop is the Holy Father. This is never done in defense of religious. Those of us who are religious know this. The papacy will never protect us from the bishops. The bihops hold a very special place in relation to the pope, that religious do not.

We have certain pontifical rights. But these were not violated in this situation. The bishop did not tell the Legion what they have to believe or how to live their religious life. That he cannot do. He simply said, please leave. That he can do. He need not give any of us, in any religious order or to the laity, an explanation.

I am amaze at how many lay people want to know what happens regarding religious communities. It’s very simple. We obey, we must obey. We are silent, we must be silent. We have no opinion. We may not have an opinion unless our superior says so. We have no feeling unless our superior says so. Otherwise, we keep all opinions, feelings and questions to ourselves. And our usual answer is, we obey.

If you meet any religious who says anything further than “I obey” without the permission of his superior to express anything else, in a situation like this, you have a religious who is not orthodox. That’s not how obedience operates.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

The priests may not have known what the lay people were doing…you are missing the point. The clubs may or may not have been introduced into the schools by RC people. It sounds as if the principals were confused also…the priests do not go to the clubs. The first obligation of married people due to the sacrament they have received is to their marriage and family. They are not thinking about the obedience of religious or the requirements thereof, they just wanted a good club for their kids.

Also, the Visititation run by Chaput is only to gather information from the priests. It is not to fix problems, or to look into Regnum Christi or the Consecrated. Only the priests…to be sure that they are a healthy congregation.

 

[JReducation]

The priests may not have known what the lay people were doing…you are missing the point. The clubs may or may not have been introduced into the schools by RC people. It sounds as if the principals were confused also…the priests do not go to the clubs. The first obligation of married people due to the sacrament they have received is to their marriage and family. They are not thinking about the obedience of religious or the requirements thereof, they just wanted a good club for their kids.

Also, the Visititation run by Chaput is only to gather information from the priests. It is not to fix problems, or to look into Regnum Christi or the Consecrated. Only the priests…to be sure that they are a healthy congregation.

I’m not missing the point. The point that I’m making is that there is a lot of defending of the LC and religious don’t want to be defended by the laity, because it creates a wedge between the religious and their major superiors and the local bishop.

As to the RC, no one said that the LC knew anything about it. All that came out of the Archdiocese is that they are not allowed in the Catholic schools because they never asked for permission to have the clubs there. The moment you use the name of an association, you’re in trouble. No association my exist in any parish or Catholic school without being erected by a bishop. This does not mean that a member of an association cannot volunteer at a parish or a school as an individual. That’s between the iindividual and the person in charge: pastor or principal.

Let’s assume for a moment that I’m a member of the RC. If I go into a Catholic school as a volunteer, I cannot use the name RC or mention them, unless the RC spirit is allowed in that school by the diocese. This happens all the time. Our Franciscan family has the Secular Franciscan Order, which is a real religious order for secular men, women, deacons, priests and bishops. In fact, the SFO was been around for 800 years and is an international order. However, when they are in a diocese, the brothers and sisters may not say that they belong to the SFO when they work in a parish or institution run by the diocese, unless they are canonically erected by the bishop of that diocese with the approval of the Superior General of the Secular Franciscans or his delegate. The superior and the bishop have to draw up a contract that describes their role in his diocese and where they may or may not go. Most Secular Franciscans are married lay men and women. They live in pairshes. But unless they are authorized by the bishop to exercise their presence, they must remain anonymous and they cannot take on a ministry as a group.

Normally, this is not a problem. All it takes is a letter from their major superior, not the friars, the major superior of the seculars. The letter must go to the bishop and the bishop must write an approval. Once that’s done, then there is no issue. If they go into a parish or school and say that they are Franciscans, which they are, then there is a problem if they do not have a letter of obedience from the bishop. What happens is that if something goes wrong, the bishop is the one who has to pick up the pieces, because these are his schools. The only time that this is not necessary is when they enter a school that is owned and run by a religious order. In that case, the bishop has no jurisdiction. The major superior of the order who owns the school is the responsible and he or she approves who volunteers in his/her school.

This is not about marriage or what the parents want. In the end, the parents have no say in who enters a Catholic school. Only the major religious superior of the order that runs the school or the local bishop have authority over what happens in a school. We have to remember, parents do not have to send their kids to a Catholic school. But if they choose to do so, they also agree to abide by the rules of the diocese or the religious order who owns the school. Parents are never legal authorities in any Catholic school, unless they own it.

The only authority that Church law acknowledge in Catholic schools are the bishop, if the school is diocesan, the major superior if the school is religious and the Sacred Congregation for Christian Education. Many people do not realize this. I know. Many parents think that they have an authoritative voice in Catholic schools, as they would in public schools. This is not the case. Parents have a consultative voice. They exercise this through parent organizations such as PTA or PTO.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

 

[exLegionary]

Dear poster, I was struck by your dismissive reference to the Vatican Investigation into the Legion of Christ

Also, the Visititation run by Chaput is only to gather information from the priests. It is not to fix problems, or to look into Regnum Christi or the Consecrated. Only the priests…to be sure that they are a healthy congregation.

1] You know quite well that the Visitatiion of the Legion of Christ was launced from the highest Vatican echelons, from the office of the Secretary of State, Bertoni, and is extensive to the whole Legion in Europe, USA&Canada, Mexico and South America.

2] It does not target only priests, as you state, but the whole religious community [order] of the Legion of Christ, all members, brothers [religious in formation, who are much more numerous than the priests: 2,500 VS 750 circa]

3] The Legion and Regnum are inseparable and follow the same guidelines, the rules and the statutes being very similar; in fact, Legion priests are ultimately the directors of the Legion Christi Movement, as they are the Spiritual Directors of the Regnum Christi members, especially the consecrated ones, female and male, known as 3rd Grade, from the Spanish, Tercer Grado. Frontline RC members depend on their Spiritual Directors who ultimatel depend on the Legionary Priests.

4] In their apostolate, members of the Regnum Christi may not do anything without the approval of their [Legionary] Spiritual Directors and superiors. That is why the Legionaries, are ultimately responsible for the actions of Regnum Chrsti laity in their apostolates.

 

[bunchkinbrain]

How can you state this:

:console:
The Legion of Christ is not disobedient to the bishops.

when you admit to this:

:console:
I ain’t RC or ex-Rc or Lc or ex-[L]C or a groupie to anybody.

Considering the number of dioceses from which the Legion/Regnum Christi have been banned, I’d take a second look at Maciel’s kingdom before defending it. Also, in addition to the dioceses mentioned earlier in this thread, there are a number of universities that have given the LC/RC the boot:

Steubenville
Thomas Aquinas College
Ave Maria
Christendom College
Catholic University of America

Are you prepared to call Steubenville or Ave Maria or Christendom liberal? I think the motives of credibility lie with those who are at least suspicious of all things Legion.

(BTW. For everyone else out there, in the Legionary lexicon, liberal means anyone who is not a supporter of the Legion.)

 

[otjm]

After a quick read of the the actions of the bishop, I am not surprised he does not want an orthodox Catholic organization operating within its boundaries. It may interfere with the goddess worshipping nuns, Fr. Oprah, the many openly gay priests, and the his opposition to pro life legislation. By their fruits you shall know them.

I really hope that the gay mens chorus parish tour is going well this year.

Do you blow snot on everyone and everything that doesn’t fit within your preconceived notions of what you think your church should look like?

By their very actions they proved themselves to not be oerthodoxc; part of being orthodox means accepting legitimate authority.

They didn’t. What separates them, disobeyng the bishop, from you “Father Oprah” who also disobeys? Nothing.

 

[JReducation]

Why does everyone feel the need to defend or accuse the LC? This is an issue between their major superior and the bishop. It does ot concern the rest of us. I have yet to hear the LC asking for help or trying to save face. They are remaining very quiet about this, as should any religious community.

This is my concern with these threads. We often cross boundaries why accusing others of crossing boundaries. The religious life of the LC is not the domain of anyone who is not an LC member. If you look at and ask other religious communities of men, they will just shrug their shoulders and say, “We have no right to an opinion unless our superiors say so or they ask for it.” In the meantime, those of us who are religious pray for the bishop and the LC and we go about our daily lives. What else can anyone really do?

All of us are called to holiness. The beginning of holiness is prayer. From there flow obedience and charity toward everyone involved.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

 

[Lurch104]

You are exactly correct brother. They will not speak of it because they are honorable men. Respectfully, I believe that you are wrong that it is of no concern to anyone outside of the LoC. As someone whose formation and spiritual direction was under their care, what is my recourse? Do the bishops not have an obligation and responsibility to their flock? How would you react from being separated from your community by a bishop without process or appeal. You will say that the bishop has no right, however, we have no such protection or rights. The fact that none of the bishops involved has reached out to the laity speaks volumes. There was no communication whatsoever. No solutions, alternatives, or even a pastoral “I’m sorry but this is the way it had to be”. Just shut up and keep putting money in the basket each week.

You ask what else can you do, I would suggest praying for the faithful whose bishop and church has abandoned them.

Why does everyone feel the need to defend or accuse the LC? This is an issue between their major superior and the bishop. It does ot concern the rest of us. I have yet to hear the LC asking for help or trying to save face. They are remaining very quiet about this, as should any religious community.

This is my concern with these threads. We often cross boundaries why accusing others of crossing boundaries. The religious life of the LC is not the domain of anyone who is not an LC member. If you look at and ask other religious communities of men, they will just shrug their shoulders and say, “We have no right to an opinion unless our superiors say so or they ask for it.” In the meantime, those of us who are religious pray for the bishop and the LC and we go about our daily lives. What else can anyone really do?

All of us are called to holiness. The beginning of holiness is prayer. From there flow obedience and charity toward everyone involved.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

 

[JReducation]

You are exactly correct brother. They will not speak of it because they are honorable men.

You know that I’m not questioning their honor. In fact, I’m saying that they are like the rest of us religious. When things like this happen, we keep our mouths shut. We have no rights. We have no opinions. We have no questions. The only ones who have any rights, opinions and questions are the major superiors. Please do not attach yourselves to us. Grab on to the Gospel and the local bishop, he is the Church. Without him there is no Church. We religious are expendable. The bishop is not.

Respectfully, I believe that you are wrong that it is of no concern to anyone outside of the LoC. As someone whose formation and spiritual direction was under their care, what is my recourse?

The laity must understand that when it puts itself in the hands of religious, your situation is tentative. Religious can disappear faster than we can appear. One of the rights that religious do not have is permanence in any location. We need not do anything wrong for a bishop to say that he no longer needs our presence. This is a given in religious life. In addition, the major superior can also decide that you, the laity, no longer need our presence. He need not have any reason for saying it. Bishops and major superiors speak with the authority of Christ. Religious obey. There is no more that I or any LC person can say. We are not permanent in your lives.

It’s heart-warming when people love us and are attached to us. But it is not good for you, the laity or for us, the religious. We are there to serve the bishop as long as we are allowed to do so, not for as long as the laity needs us. That’s never been part of the deal between the Church and religious.

Do the bishops not have an obligation and responsibility to their flock? How would you react from being separated from your community by a bishop without process or appeal.

Bishops have a responsibility for their flock. But they are not accountable to the flock. They need not give any explanations. This comes with the territory of being successors to the Apostles. That’s why religious do not ask for explanations. Religious only have due process and appeal for matters within the community, not with the bishop or with their superior. Slaves had more rights. Religious surrender all rights. Therefore, all laymen and women who are served my religious have no right to an appeal or an explanation from the bishop when it comes to dealings with the religious commuinity. It’s a closed system. It has been that way since Benedict founded western monsticism.

The only time that the Church allows for an appeal is when a the rights of a religious commuinity, granted by canon law, are violated by a bishop or the major superior. But this is not such a case. There were no rights granted by canon law that were violated.

The fact that none of the bishops involved has reached out to the laity speaks volumes.

All he is allowed to say is why he asked them to leave his diocese and he may not reveal all of it either. If there is something immoral, such as scandal, he may not say it. Then the religoius community does have the right to appeal to the Holy See in defense of its good name.

There was no communication whatsoever. No solutions, alternatives, or even a pastoral “I’m sorry but this is the way it had to be”. Just shut up and keep putting money in the basket each week.

What I read from the Chancellor in Miami, there was a communique that went out to the public. It may not have said what the public wanted to hear, that’s another story.

You ask what else can you do, I would suggest praying for the faithful whose bishop and church has abandoned them.

Neither the bishops nor the Church have abandoned us. We may be unhappy. We may want more. We may want soemthing that they are not providing. All of this may be true. But they are good men who are very interested in doing the best they can with the skills they have and the resources that they have.

I’ll say one more thing, as a religious. We, religious, have no right to be in any diocese. The only place where we have a right to be is in our own religious houses. When we step into a diocese we are at the mercy of the bishop. I’ll give you a simple example. Franciscans run Franciscan University. They have no rights when they step off that campus. Once they step off that campus, they enter the diocese. They only have rights on that campus, because it’s outside of the diocese. It’s like the UN in New York or Vatican City in Rome. Therefore, we do not take it to heart when a bishop says that we must move. I can’t speak for Father Marciel, because I have never read the statutes of the LC. But most founders have told their religious to stay out of any diocese where they have no permission to be.

I believe that the laity surrounding the LC priests and brothers are concerned about their spiritual welfare and I understand that part. But in their concern for the spiritual welfare of the laity, they have forgotten the rules of engagement for religious life. What I’m trying to say here is, do not let your needs obscure the rules for religious. They’re two separate things. One cannot change the other either. Both must co-exist independently. If the Francisans, Dominicans, LCs, Jesuits and so forth move out of a diocese, find another spiritual guide.

Those are the rules of engagement when dealing with religious. We’re like the marines. We’re in today and gone tomorrow. I’ll part with one simple question. Had it not been the bishop, had it been the major superior who had pulled out the LC, without any explanation, would you be so upset?

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

 

[Lurch104]

Those are the rules of engagement when dealing with religious. We’re like the marines. We’re in today and gone tomorrow. I’ll part with one simple question. Had it not been the bishop, had it been the major superior who had pulled out the LC, without any explanation, would you be so upset?

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

I would have been upset had they left without explanation or giving suggestions for an alternate arrangement. The marine analogy is appropriate. Maybe as a military man, I treat abandoning ones comrade much more seriously than the church. A marine would never leave a buddy without support, period. Your explanation on obedience is well received. The LoC priest I worked with would be less than happy with me for not taking things as they are and moving forward.

Thank you for your patience brother.

 

[JReducation]

I would have been upset had they left without explanation or giving suggestions for an alternate arrangement. The marine analogy is appropriate. Maybe as a military man, I treat abandoning ones comrade much more seriously than the church. A marine would never leave a buddy without support, period. Your explanation on obedience is well received. The LoC priest I worked with would be less than happy with me for not taking things as they are and moving forward.

Thank you for your patience brother.

First of all, thank you for your kind and honest reponse. It’s like a breadth of fresh air. I will add this, the way that we religious think is a little different from the way a marine would think, though we operate in a similar manner. From our point of view, we’re not leaving a buddy without support. From our point of view, when we leave you, the laity, we leave you in God’s hands. Those are much better than our own.

Second, I understand your feelings when you say above that you would have been hurt anyway, if the major superior had pulled out the LC without an explanation or suggestions of an alternative arrangement. But I’m afraid that’s the way it actually works when you’re dealing with religious.

We’re not given any explanations either. We’re told to pack up and leave. This may be the local bishop or our superiors. But we know, when we enter religious life, that this is going to be the norm for the rest of our lives.

I’ll give you an example that happened to me. I was the principal of a school for six-years. My superior wanted me to move into Respect Life Ministry. He never mentioned it to me. One day he came to visit us and he said to me tha the wanted me to go back to school for a doctorate in theology. At the time I had a Licentiate in theology and a PhD in psychology. I had gone to school to study education psychology because the community wanted me to run sch
ools. He gave me no warning that he wanted me to go back to school.

I asked him, “When do you want me to apply?” His answer almost made me fall on my butt.

He said, “I have applied for you and you have been admitted. You leave for Rome in 48 hours.” He got up and left the room. END OF CONVERSATION.

Now you see how I get my marine analogy?

I’m a widower, so I had two young adult children, a mother, four brothers and a sister. I asked him if I could call them to say goodbye. He smiled and said, “Oh, I forgot to tell you. I called your mom. Of course you can call your kids.”

I asked again, “Can I call my brothers and sisters?” He looked at me and asked, “Why?”

I could not give him a real answer other than I was going to miss them. I knew that I could not say that, because I’m not supposed to miss them. They are no longer part of my family nor am I a part of their family. So, I packed up my two habits and my few books and in 48 hours I was in Rome. I never said anything to my superior other than, “I have no idea why I would want to call them. I guess I was just thinking outloud. I apologize.”

That’s religious life. Stop and think about the teachers, parents and kids at that school. They had a new principal in 48 hours. They were told that Brother JR had left for Rome. That was it. End of story. This has been the relationship between religious and laity for almost 1,800 years.

It’s certainly 800 years old for us Franciscans. This kind of detachment is part of poverty, obedience and chastity.

Poverty says that we own nothing, not even our ministry and on one claims us as their own. We are orphans in this world, without a home, without anyone to claim us for themselves.

Chastity says that we have no family and no attachments except our religious community for whom we live and die, because through the religious community and within the religious commuinity is the only place where we find Christ.

Obedience says that we are nothing. We have no opinions. We have no rights. We have no desires. We have no questions. Because Christ had none of the above when it came to fulfilling his Father’s will. As human beings, we have feelings. Christ also had feelings. He sweat blood in the garden. He asked if this cup could be taken from him, but he surrendered to it. Thus we surrender to the cup that the Father places before us. It is our hope that the laity who come into contact with us religious, will follow our example. Otherwise, as St. Francis told us when he fonded us, then we have failed miserably. We may as well begin again, for up to now we have done nothing.

I can only speak for the Franciscan tradition. In my tradition, if the laity does not learn from us, then we have failed. We do not deserve heaven. That’s how seriously we look at this. This is why I say, do not place yourself between a religious and his superiors. You are not doing the religious any favors. You are hurting him spiritually and putting his soul in great danger. You are proving that all he has done is win you over to him, not to Christ and the Church, which is where he should have led you. In charity, you owe it to the religious to practice what he taught you.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

 

[bunchkinbrain]

Why does everyone feel the need to defend or accuse the LC? This is an issue between their major superior and the bishop. It does ot concern the rest of us. I have yet to hear the LC asking for help or trying to save face. They are remaining very quiet about this, as should any religious community.

www.life-after-rc.com/2009/11/miami-alert.html

Brother JR. It seems the Legion and its supporters are not accepting His Excellency’s decision with docility and serenity. Nor does it seem that the Legion views this issue as one “between their major superior and the bishop”. If you’re correct, the Legion will step in and ask the good pastor to refrain from appealing to the Archbishop.

Let’s see what happens.

 

[JReducation]

www.life-after-rc.com/2009/11/miami-alert.html

Brother JR. It seems the Legion and its supporters are not accepting His Excellency’s decision with docility and serenity. Nor does it seem that the Legion views this issue as one “between their major superior and the bishop”. If you’re correct, the Legion will step in and ask the good pastor to refrain from appealing to the Archbishop.

Let’s see what happens.

I read the article on the link that you graciously provided. If I put aside all the comments about grouchy parishioners etc, what it boils down to is Fr. Jordi is asking the bishop’s permission to have them minister in his parish. This is perfectly appropriate. Any pastor has the right to ask his bishop for permission to have a community or an association of the faithful work in his parish. The only time that you do not need permission is when the group in question has been canonically erected in the diocese.

Fr. Jordi is a good man. If he believes that the group can serve a purpose in his parish, you can trust his judgment. He’s very wise and very holy.

Notice that he’s going about it the right way. He’s getting permission. I believe this was the point that the Chancellor made in his letter. RC did not have permission to be in the schools.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

 

[bunchkinbrain]

Br. JR,

With all due respect (and I respect you immensely), I find your last post completely inconsistent with all that you’ve said up to this point. Previously, you stated that the bishop has almost absolute authority in his own diocese and a religious congregation really should just accept his will and move on. You also stated that what happens between a religious order and a bishop is between the two parties and those of us outside of the issue should leave it alone. According to you, if Fr. Jordi is a diocesan priest, he should abide by the archbishop’s decision and not attempt to invite Regnum Christi back into the diocese. If he is a priest of a religious order, he should submit his will to the will of the archbishop, no questions asked.

In the Chancellor’s letter, the LC/RC was not only banned from schools but from all Archdiocesan activity:

"Furthermore, Regnum Christi is not nor has it ever been approved to work in any parish, school or other Archdiocesan entity. It recently has been discovered that Regnum Christi was involved in several schools without Archdiocesan approval. Any such involvement with Regnum Christi is to end immediately.

Pastors/Administrators are asked to share this information with school principals and those who coordinate parish events."

I think it’s unlikely that His Excellency will reverse himself so easily.

As for Fr. Jordi’s holiness, I make no judgement one way or the other since I do not know the man. I do however hesitate to use the word “holy” in describing anyone short of a Mother Theresa of Calcutta. Devout, maybe. Faithful, maybe. Godly, maybe. “Holy” I reserve to the judgement of Our Lord. Let us remember that Fr. Maciel was considered a holy man; a living saint. Remarkably, some still do.

 

[JReducation]

Br. JR,

With all due respect (and I respect you immensely), I find your last post completely inconsistent with all that you’ve said up to this point. Previously, you stated that the bishop has almost absolute authority in his own diocese and a religious congregation really should just accept his will and move on. You also stated that what happens between a religious order and a bishop is between the two parties and those of us outside of the issue should leave it alone. According to you, if Fr. Jordi is a diocesan priest, he should abide by the archbishop’s decision and not attempt to invite Regnum Christi back into the diocese. If he is a priest of a religious order, he should submit his will to the will of the archbishop, no questions asked.

In the Chancellor’s letter, the LC/RC was not only banned from schools but from all Archdiocesan activity:

I think it’s unlikely that His Excellency will reverse himself so easily.

As for Fr. Jordi’s holiness, I make no judgement one way or the other since I do not know the man. I do however hesitate to use the word “holy” in describing anyone short of a Mother Theresa of Calcutta. Devout, maybe. Faithful, maybe. Godly, maybe. “Holy” I reserve to the judgement of Our Lord. Let us remember that Fr. Maciel was considered a holy man; a living saint. Remarkably, some still do.

Your question is a very valid one. I’ll try to reconcile what I said with my previous statements. If I’m wrong, please correct me. The rule still stand. Religious must obey, be it the bishop or the major superior. The bishop has the final word on who works in his diocese and who does not. When a bishop asks a community to leave his diocese or takes away their faculties the issue is between the major superior and the bishop. No one else really has a place in that dialogue, if there is one at all.

At that being said, a pastor can request permission to invite a religioius community into his parish. Fr. Jordi is not asking the bishop to reciind his position across the board. He’s asking for something only for his parish. Here is the difference. He’s not trying to be the defense attorney for the RC or the LC. He’s just a pastor putting in a request. See the difference?

As to Fr. Jordi being a holy man, well that’s matter of how one defines the word holy. I’m using it to mean that he’s a very faithful man and a good man.

I hope this helps.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

 

[bunchkinbrain]

Br. JR. Thank you for your clarification. That helps. I have to apologize for my tone in this thread but I’ve got a horse in this race (i.e. Regnum Christi) and it’s been a real cross at times.

 

[exLegionary]

Br. JR. Thank you for your clarification. That helps. I have to apologize for my tone in this thread but I’ve got a horse in this race (i.e. Regnum Christi) and it’s been a real cross at times.

Re your “horse in the race”. My experience of years working in the field of LC/RC clearly tells me that those who suffer enormously are the parents, siblings, close relatives and friends of Legion and Regnum Christi members; member isolation is torture.

“Outsiders” can never know how the member really is, whether they are sick or healthy, sane or in pain, where they are, where they are going…they can never have an unsupervised/unmonitored conversation with the members.

At present we get only glimpses of what is happening inside this tightly-sealed institution. How are members responding to the Apostolic Visitation, etc.? They know little, if anything, of the true nature of the more recent Maciel scandals. They live in a carefully orchestrated Information Cocoon This being one of the clearer characteristics of a cult-like organization according to cult expert, Steve Hassan.

By the same token active and obedient members cannot [are not allowed to] access this Catholic Discussion board because of “lies, calumny, detraction, misinformation” spread here by “the enemies of the Legion-and-the-Church”

To parody Sade’s chorus: “This - is - no - ordinary…religious order…no - ordinary…”

 

[Susan56]

I am curious as to what activities of the Legionaries prompted the complaints by parishioners and parents at the Miami Archdiocese school.

 

[reggieM]

By the same token active and obedient members cannot [are not allowed to] access this Catholic Discussion board because of “lies, calumny, detraction, misinformation” spread here by “the enemies of the Legion-and-the-Church”

We don’t have any LC or RC members in my diocese so I don’t know much about them. But how could they engage in any apologetical work, for example, if they’re not allowed to work with non-believers (who often spread lies about the Church)?

I don’t know how the Legion can survive with that kind of attempted control over its members (I don’t doubt that they do just as you described).

 

[otjm]

We don’t have any LC or RC members in my diocese so I don’t know much about them. But how could they engage in any apologetical work, for example, if they’re not allowed to work with non-believers (who often spread lies about the Church)?

I don’t know how the Legion can survive with that kind of attempted control over its members (I don’t doubt that they do just as you described).

It appears from the discussion that a few priests and/or brothers were brought into the diocese specifically for the purpose of taking care of the spiritual needs of RC members.

As such, they were limited to taking care of the needs of the RC members; so any apologetic work if it was to be done was to be done to RC members; it was not to be done to the general public, nor to other Catholics who were not associated with LC/RC.

It would appear they were not brought into the diocese - or allowed into the diocese - for the purpose of doing apologetics, or working with other Catholics, or inquirers to the Faith in general, or working with non-believers. So that is essentially a non-issue.

 

[reggieM]

It appears from the discussion that a few priests and/or brothers were brought into the diocese specifically for the purpose of taking care of the spiritual needs of RC members.

As such, they were limited to taking care of the needs of the RC members; so any apologetic work if it was to be done was to be done to RC members; it was not to be done to the general public, nor to other Catholics who were not associated with LC/RC.

It would appear they were not brought into the diocese - or allowed into the diocese - for the purpose of doing apologetics, or working with other Catholics, or inquirers to the Faith in general, or working with non-believers. So that is essentially a non-issue.

I was referring to the “active and obedient members cannot [are not allowed to] access this Catholic Discussion board” – and not just the priests and the brothers. This would be with regard to the lay persons who are active and obedient to the RC ministry. If they are forbidden from spreading the faith to non-Catholics, that would be quite severe control over their lives. In other words, they’re told not to visit CAF. But does that mean that they can’t work with anyone who might tell lies about the Church (as many non-Catholics do)?

I’m questioning the policy and how they enforce it – and how could RC members actually live by it.