Rules of blogging: There are certain subjects which attract massive numbers of comments. Liturgy. Immigration Policy. Catholics and political life. The Legionaries of Christ.
Last week, the Archbishop of Baltimore sent a letter to the Superior General of the LC regarding his expectations of the Legion in the Archdiocese. The text of the letter is here, on the Archdiocesan website.
The gist of the letter is that the Legion and its lay arm, Regnum Christi, must provide to the Archdiocese exact and specific accounts of its apostolates. Who is doing what and where. By June 30.
In addition, the letter addresses questions of vocation recruitment and spiritual direction, especially to persons under the age of 18.
This is very interesting because anyone who has followed both LC and RC over the years knows that these are precisely the areas (well, besides the issues related to its founder – whose death, I would like to remind folks, was never publicly commented on by the Pope or the Vatican – unheard of regarding the death of the founder of a religious order or important “new movement.” ) which have caused controversy in many areas of the country: questions about vocations recruitment, about the groups’ impacts of relationships in families, as well as questions about apostolates presenting themselves without making it clear that they are efforts of LC/RC.
Update: The Archbishop’s explanatory letter on this in a recent edition of the Archdiocesan paper.\
I have met a good number of Regnum Christi members who lead exemplary Catholic lives and see this movement as a God-send. But I also am well aware of the challenges that have led a number to leave the movement, some angrily insisting that Church authority must act to correct the excesses they claim have endured. Hence, the dialogue these last five and more years.
At a meeting last week between the Superior General of the Legion and our staff, it was agreed that he would appoint a liaison to oversee the activities of Regnum Christi and keep our Chancery and appropriate pastors fully informed. This includes programs and methods of vocation recruitment. (The text of the full letter agreed to can be found on our own website, http://www.archbalt.org.)
For some time I have wondered whether the flaws of the Legionary movement were endemic to the movement itself. By this final step, I hope to have been proved wrong.
May the goal of all who are involved be guided by the counsel of Pope Benedict in his address to a worldwide gathering of “Ecclesial Movements and New Communities” in 2006. He stated that the Church “… is also grateful for you for your readiness not only to accept the active directives of the Successor of Peter, but also of the Bishops of the various local Churches who, with the Pope, are custodians of truth and charity in unity. I trust in your prompt obedience … [The] Movements must approach each problem with sentiments of deep communion, in a spirit of loyalty to their legitimate Pastors.”
I am particularly grateful to present and former members of Regnum Christi, to the priests and leadership of the Legion, as well as to our own priests and Chancery staff whose concerns have led to what I pray will be a graced path forward that addresses our concerns and leads to the best service for all God’s people.
That’s a very impressive letter. Charitable, expecting the best, clearly communicating the concerns and expectations.
Is it available as a Word template?
(well, besides the issues related to its founder – whose death, I would like to remind folks, was never publicly commented on by the Pope or the Vatican – unheard of regarding the death of the founder of a religious order or important “new movement.” )
An interesting point, Amy – I hadn’t realized that.
But that *is* remarkable. And unheard of.
I would have some concerns about the letter.
1) The release of membership rolls. Is there any other organization in the diocese that must give the names of all of its members? Also, it seems ominous that pastors are to be given information on members of their parish without those members explicit permission. Given the “reputation” of the Legion, will those pastors then “target” said members in various ways – for example, excluding them from parish organizations?
2) The forbidding of ongoing spiritual formation for those under 18. Does this also apply to the Jesuits, Dominicans, Franciscans, or only the Legion?
3) methodologies for gaining new members? That is not somethings that is always easy to put in writing. Again, does the Holy Name Society have to go through this?
I fully agree with the need to know what priests are in the diocese (this should go without saying, but for the Legion, it sometimes does not), and also who is in charge of the apostolates. Also, there is a need to know what and where the apostolates are, and to be sure they are clearly identified as being LC/RC. That part of the letter does not bother me.
I never trusted this group (ever since the Jesuits, I’ve always been extremely leary of anything coming from Spain). I understand that anything good will always have its detractors. But this group just seems odd. Not Opus Dei odd, but almost “Bayside Bimbo” odd.
Clearly, the Archbishop is micromanaging, one might even say go as far as to say that he is looking to pick an excuse to give them the boot. Perhaps, he feels that is necessary in this case.
It is clear, the LC has vocations but the dioscese does not.
John,
You might want to check with the Archbishop about his concerns before you decide he’s micromanaging. He’s not the only bishop who has expressed concerns…
Scrutiny is good. It’s good in family, work, politics, business and religious activity. It’s just too bad that the same degree of due diligence often hasn’t, or isn’t, being applied to other church sanctioned ministries (RCIA, Family Life, marriage prep, or host of other activities).
Cheers from Canada.
Tony
Does the diocese have huge turnover rate with vocations and PTSD created by its formation program?
It is clear, the LC has vocations but the dioscese does not.
At last count, twelve men entered the seminary from the Archdiocese of Baltimore last year. Granted, Baltimore is suffering from a vocations crisis for years, but things have been looking up recently. And Abp. O’Brien knows a thing or two about vocations and seminaries.
The LCs, unlike the Franciscans or the Holy Name Society, are morbidly secretive. Hence, they require extra scrutiny.
I accidentally just deleted a comment – could whoever wrote it please repost? Sorry.
By way of comparison, just a few months after Maciel died, the Pope’s telegram on the occasion of the death of Chiara Lubich, founder of Focolare.
“I would like to remind folks, was never publicly commented on by the Pope or the Vatican – unheard of regarding the death of the founder of a religious order or important “new movement.”
I’m not certain you’re correct about that, actually. The founder of Cursillo, Edward Bonnin, died Feb. 6 –same time frame as the LC founder– and I never saw any public comment from the Vatican about him, either. Maybe I’m wrong, but I was keeping an eye out based on your comment about this at the time. Isn’t it possible B16 just has a different protocol? He has such close relationships with C&L and Focolare, of course they’d be exceptions.
(Was that the deleted comment?)
The reminder about spiritual direction of minors is critical. Most parents don’t know that it is forbidded by canon law. (Can a canonist jump in to help out with this?) Parents are often relieved to see their children “chat” with such clean-cut young men, or the consecrata, thinking they could only shore up the Catholic upbringing they’ve worked so hard to assure. What they don’t realise is that undue pressure is placed on these kids, encouraging them to give their lives to the Movement — and (the coupe de grace) “souls are lost because of your lack of generosity.” What a mind-game for conscientious kids. Soon, the parents find their own authority undermined and the children secretive and brooding over their “elite vocation” to save the Church.
These types of actions by a bishop do not occur in a vacuum. We can safely assume that the Archbishop has incountered the very problems he seeks to remedy: operation by the LC and RC in his archdiocese without revealing themselves to the archdiocese or to pastors, undue pressure placed on minors for vocational recruiting, lack of communication with parents of recruited minors…
And so the com-box begins. This will twist and turn and dark things will be said about the archdiocese without substantiation (and already have been said) and dark things will be said about the Legion without substantiation.
The bottom line is: Will this group do exactly what the Church asks, or not?
Concerns — even vigorously expressed and vigilantly investigated concerns — are ENTIRELY appropriate on the part of the Church. They were there for the Franciscans, Domincans, Jesuits, Salesians, Ligourians, and, yes, Opus Dei, and, God willing will be there for whoever follows.
And now, someone is already formulating a brilliant take-down of this simple thought that cuttingly puts me in my place, or shows the Legion to be a twisted thing that squirms past all this.
For those who have ears to hear, let us follow Christ and his Church as straight-forwardly as our human nature will allow. At least, that’s what they always tell us to do in Regnum Christi.
We need transparency with Church organizations and with the selection of bishops. Secrecy is spooky. Reconciliation and spiritual direction are proper places for confidentiality.
An informative summary from a balanced source, Whispers in the Loggia:
While scores of American sees have welcomed the Legion for activities ranging from education and establishing formation houses to spearheading the spiritual renewal of their secular clergy, Baltimore isn’t the first Stateside diocese to put the communities under a closer spotlight. Several local churches have enacted similar policies to O’Brien’s over the last decade; most prominently, in late 2004 then-Archbishop Harry Flynn of St Paul and Minneapolis effectively banned the LC/RC from “being active in any way” in the Twin Cities.
In late January, the Legion’s controversial founder Fr Marcial Maciel Degollado died at 87. After a lengthy investigation by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith was concluded in 2006, Maciel became the highest-profile cleric to cease from public ministry under the specter of sex-abuse allegations when, in exchange for the Vatican’s decision to “forgo a canonical process” (keeping the matter out of a church tribunal), the priest known to his faithful as “Nuestro Padre” accepted of a secluded life of prayer and penance. Its constitutions originally approved by the Holy See in 1983, in recent months foreign press reports indicated that the Legion’s practice of “secret vows” — including one to not criticize the judgments or acts of a superior — has been dissolved at the personal behest of Pope Benedict.
To cite one new apostolate that doesn’t indicate its LC connection: ENDOW, a study group for Catholic women. Not even the friend organizing it in our parish was aware of that.
Isn’t it interesting that year in and year out, the one and only topic on this lively blog that draws a comment from Tom Hoopes is the merit of the LC’s?
Tom Hoopes – “there you go again”
What you see in RC is either not what everyone else sees or you think a diocese has nothing to worry about a group that has rules like:
SECRECY:
“3) learn to be discrete at all times in sharing information about the current situation or reality of the Movement itself, especially with those families who do not belong to it; ”
– maybe the Archdiocese thinks someone should know?
“569. Never facilitate, without serious cause, oral or written distribution of reports or facts about legionaries, or writings of the Legion without authorization by superiors. Be very prudent and discreet in your comments so as not to unnecessarily damage the Legion. ”
– clearly the Archdiocese must INSIST on reports, or they clearly will not receive any information.
“570. Be shrewd when dealing with strangers. Respond with precision, moderation and discretion to questions they may ask, keeping in mind the good or evil they are capable of doing to the Legion and to each other in passing along a fact or expressing an opinion.”
– In the LC paranoid mindset, the Archdiocese IS A STRANGER.
“572. Avoid dealing with or discussing personal problems with your companions. It is better to refer these problems to those whom God has designated to help you on your road to loyalty and satisfaction.”
– not even fellow LCs know what each other really thinks.
FAMILY
“65. When receiving family visits, always appear happy, cordial, attentive, grateful and satisfied with the vocation that God has granted you. ”
– even when the youth is unhappy?
“66. Do not fall into states of sadness or homesickness in your relationship with your family and do not become accustomed to discussing with family members your emotional state when you are experiencing depression or some unresolved difficulty so that you do not disturb them with problems that relate solely to your personal relationship with God and with the Legion.”
– why shouldn’t one feel free to discuss issues with family?
“68. Try to rouse family members sympathetic to the Legion so that they may support it with their prayers and sacrifices, in word and in deed, and especially so that they may become instruments in the search for new vocations.”
– so they should turn their family into recruiters?
Beware, Jackson. When Regain made such information available, it was sued by the Legion for undermining it’s ability to “evangelise.” The methodology that demands no criticism from members applies to the rest of the Church as well. Regain members are still swimming in legal fees for stating publicly what you cited above.
How can anyone defend secrecy in programs involving minors after the recent scandals? Transparency should benefit the LC and is a basic part of the proper oversight of the Bishop.
Oooops, I left out a good one from the RC Manual:
“99. In accordance with a spirit of apostolic humility and evangelical discretion, avoid launching open campaigns or issuing publicity statements concerning the nature, goals, methods and apostolic activities of Regnum Christi.
Never communicate to outsiders the number of its members nor give them lists of persons or works of the Movement. ”
– I guess the Archbishop is an exception to ‘NEVER’ ? It will be interesting to see.
The questions with minors are hard. I do feel the LC is too agressive with minors. They encourage parents to send their kids to an LC boarding school at quite a young age. At seventh grade it is quite common for kids to be sent thousands of miles from home. I do wonder about pushing vocations too hard too soon.
On the other side, often the kids can be much more devout than the parents. The LC can be doing something quite appropriate like asking teens to fast or have periods of silence. Parents can freak out because they think going to mass every Sunday is religious extremism. So there is a tension and teens often handle it by lying to their parents, the LC, or both.
What exactly qualifies as “ongoing and individual spiritual direction?” It seems like there can be lots of disagreement about that. If your school is run by the order does that mean nobody employed by the school can provide spiritual direction? For many parents that is the whole point of sending their kids to such a school.
I have a friend who enthusiastically promotes “Challenge” for young girls. Her 7th grade daughter is involved and she truly believes it is the best faith formation group out there. And there ARE some very admirable features. But my biggest concern is the influence and emotional manipulation that appears to take place during these gatherings (in particular the retreats – away from parents). It is my understanding that young girls (under 18) are asked to consider consecrating themselves to Christ and to a possible future vocation to the religious life. And that’s not a bad thing in and of itself. My concern is that these young girls are very susceptible to peer pressure and emotionalism. Even “positive peer pressure” can lead to decisions that are not truly free. I have kept my 11 year old daughter out of Challenge and based on the things I’ve seen, the information I’ve gathered and my gut reaction, I will continue to do so. It just all seems a little cultish to me.
Charles Collins:
As far as I know, the membership rolls of public religious institutes are public. Except for extraordinary circumstances when the lives of members may be endangered, there is no reason not to provide a full list of who is a member and where he or she is assigned.
Jackson:
I agree that the discouragement of discussing personal matters with one’s family is disturbing. True, not every family situation is healthy, but in those that are healthy (including those likely to produce vocations to the priesthood or religious life) relationships should be encouraged to advance.
Tom Hoopes:
I agree entirely. Some of my Dominican brothers have had very good experiences with LC, and others have had very bad experiences. Myself, I’ve not had any direct experience. I have a friend who has an RC spiritual director who generally seems to give good direction, yet has not pressured her to join RC. So I believe there is probably a great deal of good in LC/RC; but that should not blind us to what is or may be corrupt. Obedience and accountability can only purify and make stronger what is good in these institutes.
Jackson –
If these rules are real, then the group is psychologically unhealthy. Seriously.
I always thought that a vocation meant that you pour yourself out in a particular way, not that you reserve, hide, and secret away your real self.
God bless this conscientious bishop.
I am glad to hear that the Archbishop is addressing the issue of spiritual direction with youth but I think it would be extremely difficult to monitor since this technique is critical to their success in recruiting youth. They will miss the heart of the message and bypass this ruling by recruiting the kids to their camps and summer programs which are not in the Archdiocese. It is here they will do “spiritual direction” The Legion feels that they are being persecuted and will justify continuing these practices since this is so central to how they operate. They will say that everyone has a right from God to receive spiritual direction and the that the Archbishop is acting political and spiritually.
When I was in RC lay persons where appointed to give spiritual direction. Everyone of these persons were morally very good individuals but none of them had any previous experience or professional training in counseling. There were some individuals who had very serious personal issues that would have been challenging an experienced counselor. The Legion was receiving heat for having lay persons give spiritual direction so they solved the problem. The kept everything the same and changed the name to spiritual guidance. Problem solved Legionarie style!!
Either
1. R.C. is perfect, in which case it’s inhuman and oughtn’t be trusted.
2. R.C. is mostly good, with problems, in which case the Church should refine it while recommending it for its good qualities.
3. R.C. problems are significant enough to make it a mostly bad thing, with some good elements, in which case the Church should rescue what’s good while moving in a prudent way to disband it.
4. R.C. is perfectly evil, in which case it’s inhuman and oughtn’t be trusted.
To believe Nos. 1 and 4 is tempting at times to different groups of people. But both are clearly a trap … easy to see when spelled out this way, but truly traps in the experience of some.
Our job is to reduce the people in thrall to No. 1 and No. 4 above — each always ends badly — and watch what the Church does to see if it’s going to be No. 2 or No. 3 in the end.
I have at times begun to suspect No. 3 … always through the dark insinuations of others, because my own experiences in R.C. have been great. When this has happened, I have re-evaluated everything with a jaundiced eye, only to find that the Church keeps acts according to No. 2 above.
It is heartening to hear Vatican Clergy Cardinal Rode’s words, and it is instructive to see that even amid the refinements, the encouragements always come, too.
Here’s a Cardinal Rode link:
http://www.devinrose.heroicvirtuecreations.com/blog/2008/05/18/cardinal-rode-celebrates-mass-in-honor-of-father-maciel/
Cardinal Rode seems to be the only Roman prelate who is favoring the Legion of Christ and the Regnum Christi right now. All others shine for their silence– including the Pope.
Despite his Vatican power, Cardinal Rode is not the pastor of the flock of Baltimore, MD
The last I heard, Cardinal Rode was the prefect of The Congregation for Institutes of Consecrated Life and Societies of Apostolic Life, not “Vatican clergy Cardinal”
Have other movements such as Opus Dei, etc. had similar scrutiny? Just curious.
Also, I’ve noticed that RC groups tend to varry in their fervor. The one in my area is hardly pushy and helps out with various diocesan events. But the group in my hometown were known for their pushiness, both for vocation potential and pressuring unknowing youth ministers like me to sponsor a YTM event.
Just an observation.
I understand that there are some concerns with LC and RC, particularly their outreach among young people. The archbishop of Baltimore has chosen to address these concerns with the steps in the letter. That, to me, sounds somewhat reasonable.
I was involved with RC’s college groups for a while (CL groups, “Christian Life” groups). I found them to be incredibly valuable in my spiritual development, and I was never pressured in any way. Of course, I wasn’t under the age of 18 when I met up with these groups.
But I began thinking back to myself when I was a teenager. Back then, I was an evangelical Protestant, and I was on fire for God. I went to Sunday morning services, Sunday school, Sunday evening youth group, Wednesday night small group Bible study and accountability groups, occasional weekend activities, retreats, summer service trips, weeklong summer camps, etc. My whole life revolved around my faith.
Now, I’m Catholic, and I watch the teenagers in my parishes struggle to live out their faith. I taught CCD to 7th-grade girls for a couple years (in two different parishes), and many of my students desperately wanted to live out their faiths. They wanted lives that revolved around their faith. But in our parishes, that wasn’t exactly a strong possibility.
There is Sunday Mass, of course, and depending on the parish there may be daily Masses available or maybe even perpetual adoration of the Blessed Sacrament. But generally, most Catholic parishes offer very little to devout teens.
CCD generally stops after confirmation, somewhere between 7th and 9th grades. So the teenagers in most Catholic parishes don’t have regular Sunday School available to them, as evangelical Protestant teens do. And the youth groups in most Catholic parishes are laughable — small, poorly attended, hosting few activities, staffed by leaders who have no sense of what young people need or want and sometimes hold rather heterodox beliefs. The bishops’ document “Renewing the Vision” provides a good vision of youth ministry, but I’ve never seen it fully (or even halfway) implemented in a parish.
Is it any wonder, then, that LC and RC are so attractive to devout teens who want their lives to revolve around their faith, who want their faith to matter?
Those who are concerned with LC and RC, instead of only policing what LC and RC are doing among young people, ought to take a long, hard look at what most parishes and dioceses offer teens and young adults.
While LC loyalist Tom Hoopes worries about the “dark insinuations” of those who question his movement, Randy slips in this time-tested Legion gem: “Parents can freak out because they think going to mass every Sunday is religious extremism.”
The first truth of my experience with this group is that Legion loyalists believe with all their hearts that anyone who does not support the Legion is psychologically flawed, spiritual damaged, or not in full communion with the Church.
The second absolute truth of my experience is that those who are most outraged by the Legion are conservative, orthodox Catholics who are outraged by the Legion’s bastardization of our faith as a means of gaining personal power and influence.
Tom Hoopes,
I’ll take your bait. You set up #1 as clearly false, then attempt to link 1 & 4 together, thereby creating a presupposition that neither 1 nor 4 can be true, but 4 certainly can be (even while acknowledging some apparent good to them, since nothing, not even Satan can be ‘perfectly evil’ ). By linking these together you can then propose 2 and 3 as more ‘reasonable’ and ‘moderate’ approaches. It sounds good, but you haven’t proven it.
As a conservative, orthodox Catholic who gave many years of life to the LC, I now realize how badly corrupt a group it is and I do believe, based on years of experience and reflection, inside and out, that I consider #4 as the most accurate.
Of course, not being on their payroll makes it easier to do. :)
You see, I was deceived into believing that the LC was a conservative orthodox group that promoted authentic Catholic teaching and supported the Church.
Now I realize that everything they do is basically a scam designed to fool people, even their own members, and that at its core it is a cult, founded by a very sick and twisted man, again all while in the guise of goodness and service.
Further, I think one can argue that the Church thinks #3, and the Pope is trying to slowly weaken and eventually disband the LC/RC, which is basically a cancer threatening the host with death. (a threat that cannot happen, of course, but severe damage can be done – think of Arianism, Reformation, etc.).
I’m sure you have had a positive experience in RC, because that is one of its goals. But like all of the LC hyper-utilitarianism, that ‘goal’ is only at the service of its bigger Goals – growth in numbers, wealth and influence, for its own benefit.
Maciel built a fast and out of control machine, will someone please grab the controls or turn it off before more people get run over?
“I was involved with RC’s college groups for a while (CL groups, “Christian Life” groups). ”
Are RC groups also known as Christian Life? There is a Peruvian-based Christian Life Movement that, as far as I know, is independent of RC and quite lively.
There is a need for a purification within the Movement. I have observed things that I do not think are right. However, It is an absolute fact that there are many, many, sincere, holy, deeply prayerful, self-sacrificing, hard working men and women priests and consecrated who have given their lives in the Movement out of love for God. When there was nowhere else to turn for a man with a vocation to the priesthood during the last disastrous thirty years, many were drawn to the Legion because they were faithful to the authentic teachings of the Church and to the Pope. They have paved the way for uncountable souls to find a deep spiritual life. There are numerous men and women of the highest character who have found there way into the Legion and consecrated life where they found the true faith believed and taught. B16 would have closed them down altogether if this were not true. The non-criticism issue, pressure for vocations, secrecy, and other things are quite valid problems that if not addressed in a forthright manner will take them down.
I never trusted this group (ever since the Jesuits, I’ve always been extremely leary of anything coming from Spain)
The order was founded in Mexico. Not Spain.
I had not heard of the connectin between ENDOW and RC. I thought it was started by an ordinary lay person in Denver.
I’m not particulary suspect of Tom Hoopes. Indeed his willingness to be critical of LC/RC would indicae that they are not as bad as their critics suggest. Isn’t the NCR owned by a subsidiary of the LCs?
The great number of reports and the short deadlines demanded by the AB is indicative of a warpath mentality. I have a hard time believing that the LCs are his biggest problem. What about the Jesuits at Loyola University?
Well, maybe his (AB) actions show that the LC really ARE his biggest problem, worthy of going on the warpath.
BTW, I can understand the Spain connection. There was much influence in the early years of the Legion through Maciel’s fascination with Franco, amply proven in the documentary, Vows of Silence.
Dear Ben,
Sorry to say, ENDOW is definitely an RC apostolate, one of the apostolates that they do everything possible to mask its LC identity by inviting non-RC members to be one their board. Typical RC strategy: “Hey, one of our sincere, devout members had a great inspiration on a new ministry. Let’s make it ours, but just keep it under that member’s name. We are giving him/her spiritual direction anyway, so anything we tell her she will feel obligated to do!!”
And NCR(National Catholic Register): the Legion bought it several years ago, and it is run by Legionaries and RC members.
. . . the reality of this group can be really rough to swallow!
Dudley: you’ve nailed it. Exactly. I’m sorry for your suffering — Regain has worked tirelessly for years to bring such suffering to light.
Ben: the connection is there. It has always been headed by an RC member, and the window dressing of “ecumenism” has been to throw folks off the scent. The material may or may not be good (I find it orthodox and good) but its goal is the same as the rest: Make RC look good and recruit members from its participants.
Terry: I don’t think it can be purified because the founder did not intend to serve the Church. It’s been smoke and mirrors from the start.
I’ve had a good opinion of LC/RC in years past, hadn’t heard the negatives about it, though I haven’t been close to the organization. However, I’ve got friends in two completely different parts of the country, both very faithful, orthodox Catholics, who both voluntarily expressed to me within the past year, independently and with no knowledge of each other, concerns about the RC group in their parishes. Their concerns were strikingly similar: pressure to join, controlling, isolating children from parents, pressure to discern a “vocation” (which in itself alarms me. You don’t pressure someone to discern a vocation – it’s a long, gentle, individual process that can get messed up by someone else’s pressure).
More recently, when I first heard about the vow of silence, and that Pope Benedict was lifting it, I was really alarmed. A vow of silence regarding criticism leaves no transparency or accountability, and creates a culture of secrecy that, in my opinion, will take a long time to die out because it’s so ingrained in the culture. People have been formed in it – and you don’t get over the thing like that overnight.
In my experience, one can be perfectly “orthodox,” and also totally unhealthy, if being orthodox also means being controlling, perfectionist, secretive, etc. The numbers of really good, devout people involved in LC/RC don’t, for me, excuse the unhealthy elements. I’m not interested in something that starts out good, but then turns very controlling. We have the freedom of the children of God, and should be free to exercise that freedom – especially the laity. I’d rather just be a member of my parish, study and get to know my faith, and live it out fully and freely to the maximum, helping build up my parish, not as part of a group that has a controlling reputation.
Folks, I am going to be out of town all day Thursday, so I’m going to close comments here..so people trying to post don’t get all frustrated wondering when their comments will appear.