Saturday, February 7, 2009

Life After RC Take on EWTN Interview

EWTN interview
I would like to consider a few points about Raymond Arroyo's interview with Legionary priests Fr. Jonathan Morris and Fr. Thomas Williams.
1. They admitted that the allegations of the early victims were probably true;

2. They admitted the surprising emergence of a daughter;
3. They admitted that the founder probably had deep psychological issues;
4. They admitted that they haven't dealt well with departing members because "they grew too fast;"
5. They appealed for prayerful support for direction;
6. They indicated that the future of the Legion depended on a General Chapter;
7. They indicated that there is no inherent need to disavow the founder's writing;
8. They Suggested strongly that they could rebuild if allowed to work.

Most of these are problematic for a variety of reasons:

1. The Legion hasn't officially acknowledged this, so sending them out to say "probably" is a sketchy manoeuvre, perhaps for legal reasons?
2. True, but inside sources say the Legion has known of her existence for years -- why now admit this, unless this was a hail mary pass to morph the Legion into something else.
3. This sounds like a dodge, as though he's almost not responsible. Perhaps it's a way to save the "charism," saying the good MM was holy and only the bad MM did these things when he was asleep.
4. I was really sad that this came up through a question that was not pertinent to the immediate conversation. Absolutely true, but a separate issue. That said, if you cannot live charity with your existing commitments, then one shouldn't extend one's commitments. For example: If a family can barely pay their mortgage, they would elicit little sympathy for buying a boat and making the children suffer by going barefoot.
5. They have abundant prayers already. I was cynical enough to be very suspicious of their emotional appeal, because I sensed they were planted to "play" the audience.
6. This is something that only insiders can address, and the men I know insist that the Legion has never followed the regular forms for General Chapters. There is an elite cadre making essential decisions, and then subsequent layers of superiors that rubber stamp these. This sounded good but there is no precedent to make it credible.
7. Perverse. The daughter's face (or a picture of those young seminarians in their little cassocks) should be imbedded in every page.
8. They are incapable of reforming themselves. This should have been obvious for two reasons:a. they were formed by this man and the "innocent" seem unable to let go.b. there is a vested interest by those who knew this all along to protect themselves.

Finally, I would draw your attention to troubling details about each of these men:
Father Thomas Williams here and here.
Father Jonathan Morris here and here.
Overall concerns about the Legion's approach to publishing
here and here.

They are not what they seem. Their hunger for mass media apostolates is clearly a means of controlling the message.



Anonymous said...

Have you asked yourself what or who is moving you to write these things?

Anonymous said...

My vote would be for the Holy Spirit. He is the Sprit of Truth and is about a work of cleansing the Church.

Anonymous said...

And my vote is for the Holy Spirit too; and the instruments he inspires to remedy the harm done by those that have taken his name in vain.