Something that always concerned me about Legionary priests I encountered is how serious they came across when socializing with other Catholics. I never saw them laugh at themselves or their order. In fact, they would become quite serious and defensive if you joked about their similar haircuts or about certain practices associated with the order.
In contrast, I’ve been blessed with the opportunity to meet and socialize with superiors and founders of many other new movements – FSSP, Companions of the Cross, Madonna House, Opus Dei, Franciscans of the Renewal, HLI, Oratorians, Le Barroux (traditionalist) monastery – and high-profile orthodox members of older congregations and movements (Dominicans, Trappists, Studites, Knights of Columbus, Order of Alhambra) not to mention Fr. Mitch Pacwa and other orthodox Jesuits. They ALL had a sense of humor about themselves and their movement. I forget whether it was St. Josemaria Escriva or Ven. Catherine de Huek (or possibly both) who referred to themselves often as “God’s donkey,” discussing how their personal foibles and mistakes always got in the way of the work the Holy Spirit had founded through them.
And then there is Fr. Bob Bedard, founder of the Companions of the Cross (Canada’s fastest growing clerical institute of consecrated life) who so vigorously opposed to God’s call to found a new order that he tried to enlist his Archbishop in his resistance effort. Much to Fr. Bedard’s shock, his Archbishop sided with God. Only then did Fr. Bedard accept that he needed to get out of the way and allow the Holy Spirit to impart a new charism.
These are far from the sorrowful saints St. Therese warned us about.
Which is why I think we have to give Monk credit for laughing at himself. Which is what I assume is his intention in re-writing my re-write of his parable. You can read his re-write here.
We’re all aware of how ugly the situation is with the LC, especially as more victims surface with the truth. I know Monk sometimes presents himself in a manner that makes the rest of us cringe, and one is right to call him on it. But his ability to laugh at himself is a positive sign in my estimation. I would give him a good blast if I felt he was laughing at the victims or laughing in a way dismissive of the serious allegations against his former order and Maciel. But I don’t feel this is the case here. I think he recognizes the problems with Maciel and I sense he is becoming more aware of the anger and disappointment many feel towards the current LC/RC leadership.
One thing to keep in mind – something I’ve come to recognize after spending the last 10 years working with former LC and RC who were victims of Maciel – is that clergy and laity are ontologically different. A priest does not stop being a priest ontologically just because he’s been dispensed from the clerical state or stopped practicing his priesthood. So former LC clergy will, in my experience, process things differently than former RC, who are mainly laity. This is why, among former ReGAIN folk behind the scenes, I’m occasionally called to mediate between former LC and former RC.
What follows has been my experience: Former LC tend to look at Maciel’s actions and those who covered up for him in terms of abuse of the priesthood and religious life. On the other hand, former RC (with the exception of former 3gf) tend to look at the controversy in terms of betrayal of their family and how children and young people were victimized. Finally, former 3gf look at the issue in terms of betrayal of their enthusiasm for the Catholic faith.
So for some coming from Monk’s perspective – that is as a priest who had given up everything for the Legion – the monk who stole the cow analogy makes sense. Monk had everything taken from him, and then managed to survive and overcome the hardship. However, from the perspective of former RC, those who now see themselves as having sacrificed their families and their children’s well-being to perpetuate a pious fraud, I cannot think of a more horrific analogy. Hence the visceral reaction to Monk and his story among many lay commentators formerly associated with Maciel and his movement.
Regardless, all of us are called to pray for and demand justice for the victims. Yet in making sense of what happened, we cannot allow Maciel and the LC to deprive us of the ability to laugh at ourselves. There is already too much tragedy in terms of how people felt compelled to suppress human emotions “for the sake of the Kingdom”. To laugh at oneself amidst this tragedy is to re-awaken one’s humanity.
That being said, a reader has sent me this video of Fr. Alvaro and the latest lay reaction he encountered in his continuing quest for the Holy Charism:
Mrs Bible Buck – Rest in Peace
Please pray for my buddy Charlie (aka “Bible Buck” on comboxes and CB) and for the repose of his wife’s soul. She passed away earlier this week. The couple had been married 44 years, never fell out of love, and her death came as a surprise. Of course Charlie’s feeling it hard. Today is the funeral.
Some of our older readers may remember Bible Buck as an early pioneer of the contemporary Catholic apologetics movement. He was a long-distance truck driver with a grade 8 education who evangelized and defended Catholic teaching using the Bible wherever he trucked. He is also reputed to have memorized every verse of the Bible. In fact, a favorite game whenever we traveled together was for me to name a Bible verse and then listen to him recite it from memory.
His wife was a kind woman who acted as surrogate mother to Sonya and me during our first year-and-a-half in the U.S. (Before we moved to Florida) She invited us over for dinner every Christmas and Thanksgiving, was the first to visit us in the hospital after Sonya had given birth to our oldest, and did us many other favors our own moms couldn’t do from another country and a thousand miles away.
Although she and her husband were very much in love and very devout in their Catholic faith, she preferred to keep a low profile, helping people behind the scenes. So out of respect for her privacy, the family has asked that I simply name her “Mrs. Bible Buck” when requesting prayers from readers – the name by which she was known when supporting her husband’s apologetics and evangelization apostolate.
The monk, the cow and the apology
Over the past couple weeks I’ve been debating back and forth, in the comboxes of several blogs, with former LC priest Jack Keogh. He’s an Irishman who runs The Monk Who Stole the Cow blog. The name of his blog refers to a folk tale which is posted in the right margin of his blog.
Mr. Keogh is calling upon LC critics to show more charity toward those who remain in LC. Here’s my take on the situation:
A monk and his abbot were passing through a poor farming village atop the cliffs of Ireland when they came across a humble cottage owned by an impoverished Catholic family with three children. Nevertheless, the family took the monk and abbot in for the night. The family shared with the religious what meager milk and cheese the family had, produced from a single cow. This was the only farm animal the family could afford, and they relied upon the cow for their subsistence. Nevertheless, despite their poverty, the family was happy, knowing God was with them and provided for their daily needs.
The following day, as the “good” religious left the village, the abbot ordered the monk to return to the cottage and push the cow off the cliff. The abbot was widely reputed for his “holiness” and claimed “never to have said no to the Holy Spirit.” Therefore the monk obeyed as an ever-obedient co-founder. After all, being pushed off the cliff was the cow’s vocation “from all of eternity.”
About five years’ later, at a village two counties over, villagers discovered that the abbot had a certain unnatural affection for cows. What the penitential books at the time referred to as “unspeakable” sins involving farm animals. Given that this was medieval times – not the modern era where folks are somewhat more civilized – the villagers responded by pushing the abbot over the cliff. But that’s a story for another time…
The monk narrowly escaped the peasant uprising. He made his way back to the initial village under the cover of darkness. Seeing the cottage where he had stayed five years ago, and given the cold wet snow outside, he knocked on the door to request shelter and food for the night. He could not help but notice, as he waited for someone to answer the door, that the cottage was even more beaten up and weather-worn than he remembered it five years ago.
An older man answered in threadbare clothing. He had lost some weight, most of his hair, and his skin was wrinkled with worry. Yet the biggest change was in his eyes: Gone was the spark that had made the family happy, despite the poverty in which they found themselves.
“What do you want?” the old man grumbled.
“I’m a poor monk seeking food and shelter for the night,” the monk said. “You hosted my abbot and me several years ago.”
“Oh, you,” said the poor man.
“Look, I have nothing to give. It seems that everywhere you went cows kept falling off cliffs,” the peasant continued. “After our cow fell off the cliff, the baby died for lack of milk. This broke my wife’s heart, and she died about a year later. She died angry at God for having taken away our baby after showing you and your abbot some Catholic hospitality.”
“That’s blasphemy!” the monk said. “Your wife should have been more charitable with God, not to mention forgiving of our abbot. Then God would have blessed her with the serenity not to give in to the sin of bitterness.”
“Well she might have endured this crisis,” said the farmer, “but for the fate of our middle son. See, he was over in the next village begging for moldy and half-rotten potatoes – of which we ate a steady diet after our cow died – when he witnessed you pushing another cow over the cliff. You did so at the urging of your abbot. Horrified, my son ran to the bishop’s house only to catch your abbot offering the bishop a gift of freshly butchered steak.”
“My son reported what he had seen to the bishop. But your abbot denied everything and both you and your abbot claimed my son was lying out of jealousy for your meal of steak and fresh milk. It was his word against yours. That of an impoverished young boy against two men of the cloth. So the bishop believed you. He reported everything to the Prince, who also believed you and the bishop. The Prince then ordered my son’s cheeks branded with a red hot poker ending in the letter ‘L’ – a sign to all who come across him that he was a liar. Additionally, my family was ordered to turn over our remaining possessions – minus this cottage – to you and the abbot, as restitution for having accused you of pushing cows over cliffs. We never ReGAINED these possessions.”
“Well let’s not talk about past misunderstandings,” said the monk. “Let’s talk about happier things. How is your oldest daughter doing? The Abbot sensed God had called her from all of eternity to a vocation as Consecrated Wench. She would not say no to God, would she?”
“I don’t know,” said the farmer. “After speaking with other consecrated wenches who had left the village, she decided that a more merciful fate awaited her as a galley slave to Moorish pirates. Unlike your abbot, their lust is satisfied in the afterlife by 72 virgins. That’s more than twenty but less than a hundred – in case you can’t count. Anyway, it’s just me left in this hut now.”
“Well let me in and I will keep you company,” said the monk. “It is your duty as a Christian to forgive.”
“Let’s make a deal,” said the farmer. “I’ll forgive you, and offer you room and board for the evening, if you apologize for pushing my cow over the cliff and the pain it caused my family.”
“That’s not fair!” said the monk. “I was only following orders.”
“Those orders brought much evil on my family,” said the farmer. “So you can freeze outside in the snow until you apologize.”
“Okay,” said the monk, whose was feeling the chill of the wind against his soaked habit. “I apologize for the abbott’s ‘unfortunate orders,’ which I cannot explain, and the pain they’re now causing me as I try to find room and board for the night.”
“Well what about the living hell you caused my family?” said the peasant.
“How dare you act this uncharitably!” said the monk. “I know other peasants whose cows were pushed over cliffs and they don’t describe their experience as ‘living hell’.”
“Oh look, here comes a follower of St. Ignatius. I wonder if he needs room and board?” said the peasant. “After all, it’s cold and wet outside.”
“Okay, you’re twisting my arm. Although I am grateful for all the good my abbot passed on to me and others who received his charism, I… uh… apologize … for whatever pain his unfortunate orders, which I find difficult to reconcile with the good I saw while following him from village to village, caused you and your family.”
“A little better,” said the peasant. “But what about the pain YOU caused our family by following his orders. What about the pain your lies caused my son in having him branded a liar when he reported the truth about you, your abbot and cows were falling over cliffs?”
“How dare you judge me!” said the monk. “Only God can judge. Where’s your faith in the Church?”
“Behind you,” said the peasant, pointing to the Jesuit walking up the alley to investigate the situation. “Fr. Ignatius, can I offer you room and board for the evening? It’s a cold night out, I need good spiritual direction to overcome the spiritual pain that has cursed our family for the last five years, and this monk was just leaving.”
Fr. Hauke responds to criticism from Medjugorje supporters (updated)
(UPDATE 2/25: See the end of this article for an update on Thomas Müller’s remarks.)< Theologian Fr. Manfred Hauke’s recent interview with the Tagespost Catholic newspaper has drawn a lot of attention since it was published on January 15.
The interview on the subject of Marian apparitions and the Medjugorje affair was picked up by news sites in Germany, Austria, the U.S., and Argentina. Recognizing the value of Fr. Hauke’s contribution in moving the debate forward, Dutch- and Spanish-speaking sites translated all or part of the interview.
Outrage from offended followers of the Medjugorje visions was swift too: here in America, a Yale graduate student titled his rant “Theologian Manfred Hauke flunks Medjugorje 101“. That text was copied to other websites and offered through the Google news service. Since then, the author seems to have felt some shame at his insult and changed the title of the commentary.
Christian Stelzer, a member of the “Oasis of Peace” community which illicitly operates in Medjugorje, countered the interview with a set of rather pat denials [in German] about some of Fr. Hauke’s points. He pointed vigorously at the medical studies of the seers, as if they could produce a theological proof, but he did not even address the most critical argument against the messages: that some contain false doctrine.
From Germany, where the interview first appeared, a transitional deacon by the name of Thomas Müller attacked the professor on the news site kath.net, which promotes the alleged apparitions, accusing him of “spreading lies and half-truths” and of unscrupulously considering “any means correct”. Müller writes:
It is frightening how lightly Prof. Hauke calls for the “love of truth”, but spreads complete lies and half-truths himself in this interview, and silences known facts. Through it all, he sets about to mix with Medjugorje negative incidents which have nothing to do with it.
The high point, then, is the indirect conclusion that the fruitfulness of Medjugorje, which has been unique in the world in relation to conversions, vocations, the revival of the sacrament of penance, the rosary, and love for the Eucharist, comes from the work of the Devil and that the messages represent a spiritualistic phenomenon. This is an insult to God, since Hauke is thereby saying that the Devil, in order to deceive the Church, is more fruitful than the Holy Spirit.
[my translation –RC]
Clearly this is a man in high dudgeon, and not above putting words in other people’s mouths.
(Here is a machine-generated translation of Müller’s denunciation, for those who cannot read the original.)
But, as St. Paul teaches, all things work together for good, for those who love God. These overwrought and reckless offerings have done a service for the Church, by revealing the depth of illusion, of denial, even sometimes prelest, if I may say so, generated by the false mysticism of Medjugorje.
Professor Hauke, in turn, has replied to this criticism with a statement that backs up his assertions. In the face of outrage, he is calling for more objectivity and scholarly prudence. The German original of his response is on kath.net, and an English translation follows here:
An Appeal for Objectivity
A response by Prof. Manfred Hauke to Thomas Müller’s critique of his interview on Medjugorje
For years there has been a contentious debate about the so-called “Marian apparitions” of the seers who originated from Medjugorje. The current official position of the Church is still the 1991 declaration of the Yugoslav Bishops Conference, which emphasizes: “non constat de supernaturalitate”, i.e. it cannot be affirmed that these matters concern supernatural apparitions or revelation. The local Bishop Ratko Perić goes beyond this affirmation and has emphasized his conviction, according to which it has been established that the pertinent phenomena are not of supernatural origin. Among Catholic Christians, it should be possible to discuss the questions connected with this matter objectively. My interview in the Tagespost, which has been propagated in various languages since then, was a contribution to this very necessary discussion. If it should happen that I have, in the process, repeated any false information, I am ready and willing to correct these errors. Thus far I do not see any reason for corrections.
In any case, I am shocked over the unobjective reactions of certain followers of the Medjugorje movement, who ascribe bad intentions and “lies” to me. To “lie” means to consciously state a falsehood. In my scholarly career of nearly thirty years now I have fought out many battles and have had to bear many criticisms, for example the polemics of a “woman priest” ordained somewhere on the Danube between Linz and Passau, in the magazine Publik-Forum. But even in these circles no one has ascribed a “lie” to me so far, or a presumption “that the end justifies the means”. Such reactions are character assassination. Among these, sadly, is the contribution of Deacon Thomas Müller, which appeared in kath.net (18 Feb.). Deacon Müller, who has published a master’s thesis (“Diplom” in German) on Medjugorje, asserts that I have spread “complete lies and half-truths” in my interview and that I “set about” “to mix with Medjugorje negative incidents that have nothing to do with it.” He speaks of “untruths and distortions”. Because I, on the basis of the facts presented to me, consider the possibility that the visions come from the workings of the evil one, I am even accused of an “insult to God”. These accusations are very grave.
Healing, forgiveness and the Legion of Maciel
This entry expands upon a comment I wrote at Life-After-RC.com:
A friend of mine is a spiritual director to Catholic professionals who work with abuse victims. My friend once asked a directee why some victims manage to move on with their lives, while others are stuck with the horror of what was done to them. The directee told my friend: “Those who heal and move on are those who find the ability to forgive.”
It’s not easy. Sometimes one must forgive more than once before one can receive God’s healing. Often one must also learn that forgiving one’s abuser is not the same thing as making oneself a doormat for the abuser or allowing the abuse to continue. Nor does it mean that one jettisons one’s quest for human justice, or throws caution to the wind. Which is why another friend of mine, a Catholic mother of many sons and some daughters in between, has forgiven Fr. Maciel and the Legionary priests who imposed their methodology on her older sons in the Legion’s apostolic schools. However, she will not send her younger sons to these schools, nor will she allow her daughters any further contact with LC/RC-sponsored apostolates.
Nevertheless, the road to healing lay through forgiveness. We need to pray for all of Maciel and the movement’s victims. We need to pray that the Holy Spirit – for the sake of these victims, for the sake of their healing – grants them the grace to forgive. We must encourage the victims to hold the movement accountable, to continue their quest for natural justice, but to do so in a spirit of Christian forgiveness – for their sake, not Maciel’s or the movement’s. This is the only way victims can break the bonds the movement holds over them.
Likewise, I would also ask LC/RC, both current and former, to personally ask forgiveness from those you wounded in the name of the movement, whether you did so intentionally or not. This includes spouses, children, other Catholics in the parish and the movement. You may receive a cold or angry response initially, but by asking forgiveness you show true charity of souls, since you make it easier for the person to forgive, heal and move on in life.
Similarly, I would encourage you who feel victimized by LC/RC to contact those in the LC/RC who you feel victimized you by the movement’s methodology – whether it be whisper campaigns, shunning, spiritual manipulation to put apostolate before family, being recruited into thinking ill of Maciel’s victims or covering up for his abuse, being misled about the true meaning of Maciel’s invitation to retire, etc. – and tell them that you forgive them, regardless of whether these individuals feel they have wronged you or not. Do NOT, however, allow yourselves to be drawn into debate over the rightness or wrongness of LC/RC methodology, or entertain temptation to go back, or agree to drop the pursuit of natural justice. Simply tell the members you forgive them.
As St. Paul says in Romans 12: 19-21: “Beloved, never avenge yourselves, but leave it to the wrath of God; for it is written, ‘Vengeance is mine, I will repay, says the Lord.’ No, ‘if your enemy is hungry, feed him; if he is thirsty, give him drink; for by so doing you will heap burning coals upon his head.’ Do not be overcome by evil, but overcome evil with good.”
Likewise, LC/RC charity will be overcome by true Christian charity.