Tuesday, August 18, 2009

Papal Scenarios vis-à-vis Maciel

1. John Paul II knew all about Maciel and the abuses, as well as the children, and still chose to promote him and his congregation.

2. John Paul II simply knew nothing at all except what Maciel told him, and believed it without question.

3. John Paul II heard many of the accusations in the media about Maciel and chose to believe Maciel instead.

4. John Paul II heard many of the accusations in the media and from persons in the Church and chose to believe Maciel instead.

5. John Paul II did not hear of the accusations because he was shielded by his aids who were favorable to Maciel and the Legion.

6. John Paul II heard of the accusations, and because of advice from his aids who were favorable to the Legion, chose to believe Maciel instead.

I am not finding any of these options satisfactory. The Pope, if he was going to promote Maciel to the degree that he did, had a duty to know and become as informed as possible regarding Maciel, and should never have dismissed any accusations. Even if he was shielded from the truth, he had a positive duty to find out more, despite anything his aids told him. I say this because he did really promote Maciel and set him up as an example. I don't care how many other movements the Pope did this with, he had the same responsibility in each case if he was especially going to promote an individual and his work.

Landon Cody


Anonymous said...

I agree with you 100%. I find #6 most likely, the way the Legion curried favor with his secretaries and networked to get those with influence into their debt so they could promote Maciel's and the Legion's reputation.

I should think this would give the advocatus diaboli some major ammo to scuttle the canonization, as evidence of imprudence.

Anonymous said...

I mean, wasn't it basically the same pattern repeated over and over? "Birds of a feather flock together," "by their fruits you will know them," and all the other out of context "they must be good, so-and-so likes them" recommendations. Look at how they worked the conservative movement in the US in the wake of Vatican II, look at Fr Richard John Neuhaus, and so many others, it just went up and up.

Anonymous said...

I think 4 and 5 are the most likely. But to go beyond this you have to study the daily log of visitors, and individually interrogate all the secretaries of JPII. This may not be possible. I know the LCs had a very close friendship with Mons. Stanislaus, personal sec. of JPII. It is entirely credible that he screened off bad news and at the same time reinforced JPII's convictions that MM was a persecuted saint. I did believe this myself until February 3, 2009, so I have no problem accepting that JPII was fooled by this tactic, so effective against us Christians who sincerely hold to the Doctrine of the Cross. We look for the cross to mark the authenticity of our saints. If we see it in a type like MM, we are too easily duped. MM was "the persecuted one", "the victim". It was not obvious that this was not all one fantastic lie.
I would cut JPII some slack. He is as guilty as I am of believing in MM's "sanctity", and as guilty as many other people more or less decent. There was a devilry about MM that fooled not just JPII, but other popes, prelates, and hundreds of Legionaries. I think we must look to a diabolic possession so perfect that the close contact with the Eucharist no longer could affect him.
"Edmond Ritter"

Pete Vere said...

Another possibility to consider is the following: "John Paul II was extremely accessible and the Legion exaggerated every little sign of support as 'proof' of a special relationship."

Anonymous said...

But you, Ed, are not the pope. The pope, like it or not, has a grave responsibility in front of the entire church. If you were fooled, it is partly his fault.

Exlcblogger said...

Sorry Peter, there are just too many examples to brush off this way. And he did call Maciel an efficacious model for youth. That was big. And it was ugly. It is what finally set off the Mexican men who were abused by Maciel, and they could be silent no more.

Anonymous said...

Yes, JPII was imprudent in dealing with maciel. But let's remember, it is quite frankly impossible for him to know everything about every movement. The LC is a very very small part of a very bign church which, through most of JPII's pontificate was busy dealing with issues of major geo-political significance.

Yes, he should have known in an ideal world. But that would require curial officials with a willingness to inform him and to contradict, where necessary, his basic pre-disposition to trust.

Cut JPII some slack. It is inconceivable that he knew about this problem.

E Ritter: You say that you believed MM to be a saint until this Feb. What did you think of the May 2006 statement? Was it not clear to you that there was a problem at that stage? How more clear could "independently of the founder" actually be? I'm not criticising you, just trying to understand.

Exlcblogger said...

No slack, sorry. Had JPII just been ok with the LC and MM, then fine. But he did promote MM and that is what requires the due diligence from him that he did not complete apparently. He went the extra mile with Maciel. He should have gone the extra mile to find out more.
With other issues, well they are their own issues. This one, with Maciel, JP went out of his way, but did not cover his butt on it. And that just don't cut it for a pope.

Pete Vere said...

I'm not brushing it off. But like you, I also don't find any one reason alone satisfactory.

Rather, I see what happened here as a combination of factors (of which you mention many):

1 - There was something diabolical about Fr. Maciel.

2 - JPII was always prone to suspect these types of allegation as false.

3 - Maciel had his own people in the Vatican to cover for him.

4 - JPII was facing major geo-political issues and trusted his people to vet Maciel.

And so on, and so forth... which is why a perfect storm arose.

Anonymous said...

We started working for the Legion in the 90s, feeling quite quite secure in the knowledge that the Pope loved Maciel and had held him up as a great example for youth.

That very first year, I learned of the vows of charity. When a family member told me about it (keep in mind, I had NO inkling of any accusations against Maciel at the time, absolutely NONE), I could feel the hair on the back of my neck stand up. I blurted out, "If that isn't the perfect set-up for a pedophile, I don't know what is!!!" I was astounded.

A few months later, I learned of the article in the Hartford Courant. My brain said, "Bingo! That explains it!", and I started doing some research of my own to see if the original accusers seemed credible. They did.

I did not pass certain judgment about the matter at the time, feeling that surely the Vatican would investigate and get to the root of it. Now I laugh at the idea I actually believed that! I had no idea at the time just how deeply the evil of Maciel thrust itself into our Church.

I am no rocket scientist. I don't have any special investigative tools or talents. I only had an internet connection and a mouse to click. This is why I find it so hard to understand how the Vicar of Christ, whose responsibility it is to shepherd his flock, could have been unable/unwilling to do a little research on his own.

A king in a court of intrigue should know better than to trust any one or two people. If you are going to live and work in that kind of scheming environment, you have to be wiley enough to know how to play the game. I find it inexcusable to plead ignorant and naive when so much was at stake.

JPII may have been very holy personally, but he failed his spiritual children in a terrible way. I am tired of the cult of personality that has prevented even the very asking of the hard questions in the past (you couldn't say ONE WORD negative about the Pope in some circles without having your faithfulness to the Catholic Church questioned). I am relieved the questions are finally being asked. Praise God it happened before the man was canonized!!

Anonymous said...

I believe that JPII was duped just like the rest of us. And the poor guy- he had renegade priests and bishops everywhere, communism, liberation theology- you can't blame him if he saw hope in the legion and their shiny faces.

No doubt the LC exaggerated their relationship with JPII. And no doubt JPII was too quick to lavish praise on MM and the LC. But I don't believe it was any form of malice on JPII's part.

MM was evil. And he was smarter, craftier and quicker than the Pope. Only someone embraced by the devil could be so successful at his job. MM was a child of satan. He was not just a bad man, folks. Understand that. He was an anti-christ. He was demonic. He was a son of hell.

And that is where he is now and will be for all eternity.

And that is where many LCs- corcuera, Garza, Sada, Mateos, Esquivel, Balleres, Devlin are headed if they do not come clean. Every mass they say, every prayer they utter, every rosary bead they touch is an abomination in the eyes of God until they repent.

-9 years of lies

Anonymous said...

The Maciel affair is a black mark on John Paul II's legacy, without a doubt.

But I agree pretty much with Pete that the Legion always grossly exaggerated the extent to which the Pope promoted or favored Maciel and the Legion. Ironically, the assumption that the Pope had some special love for the Legion is the one thing ex-LCs seem to take with them.

In one of John Paul II's memoirs he has a chapter on the new movements and how wonderful he thought they were. He specifically mentions a large number of movements and founders with whom he was personally close, such as Focolare, C&L and Father Giussani, Opus Dei and St. J.M. Escriva, L'Arche, Schoenstatt -- even included fairly controversial groups like the Neocatechumenate. No mention of the Legion or RC. No Maciel (there or anywhere else in the memoirs)

That's just an anecdote, but I think it's a telling one. Anytime Maciel was able to schedule an audience with the Pope (a fairly routine event for the head of even a small religious order in Rome), it was hyped by the Legion as some sort of sign of special favor. It was nothing of the sort.

The Legion had friends and protectors throughout the Vatican, especially Cardinal Sodano. And John Paul II certainly thought well of them. But it's unlikely that the Legion and RC ever took up a large amount of real estate in the Pope's head. At the end of the day, they are a fairly small order, and most of their activity is based in a few countries in the Americas rather than Europe. In the grand scheme of things, they just weren't, and aren't, that important.

Anonymous said...

Small order, lots of $$. And money talks.

What sticks out in my mind is the comment Ratzinger made about how nothing could be done about Maciel because he was so "very dear to the Pope".

I wonder if Ratzinger really made that comment. I'd like to believe it was fabricated, but having seen the clip on you-tube in which Ratzinger slapped the arm of that reporter asking about Maciel, I can't help but think it's probably true and that Ratzinger's hands were tied as far as getting rid of the child molester because the pope felt so fondly toward Maciel.

Do I think the Legion exploited the friendship between Maciel and the Pope? Sure. But note that the Pope never really did anything to dispel that notion. And his actions (or lack therof) speak volumes about the power of Maciel in high places.

Anonymous said...

Ratzinger knew everything. No doubt. Nad he probably tried to tell JPII who did not want to hear it. JPII was NOT a great administrator. Holy? yes. Brave? yes. Virtuous? yes. But he was not an administrator. So JPII probably brushed it aside like he did Card. Mahoney and Card. Marini and Arch. Weakland.

But Ratzinger within a year of his election to the Papacy brought it all back to light. He didn't have to. He WANTED to. That says everything. MM was forgotten- history- old and dying in Texas or Florida. But Benedict opened that chapter again.

Why? Only one reason. He fears hell. And that is where MM and the other LCs who perpetrated this evil will be for all eternity.

I spit on them all. I swear I'd go to Cotija just to piss on his tomb.

-9 years of lies

Anonymous said...

I don't know what I feel about Ratzinger's knowledge of Maciel's perversion and the fact he did nothing about it for years, while Maciel continued to inflict his evil and abuse.

I realize Ratzinger had a lot of politicking he had to deal with, but honestly.......that fact doesn't inspire a lot of respect for him. Yes, he played the game. And perhaps he played the game as best as he could, feeling that by staying in the Vatican, he could eventually rid it of Maciel. But in the meantime more and more people were hurt.

WHAT were Ratzinger and anybody else in the Vatican who knew about Maciel afraid of? JPII's displeasure? Blackmail? Finding themselves dead in bed like JPI? (you know, I always thought those conspiracy theorists who claimed JPI was murdered were a bunch of kooks, but now I am not so sure. I'm thinking that making the proclamation that you are going to start ridding the Vatican of corruption is probably not a very good staying-alive strategy for a Pope LOL), scandalizing the church by going public with the fact that they disagreed with JPII and thought that this Maciel was a complete pedophile and pervert? keeping up the appearances of the good ole boys' club? I honestly don't know!! I mean, JPII and the advisors who supposedly kept him in the dark regarding the perversions of Maciel were NOT living in a vacuum. Why was everyone else so afraid to expose truth?

That question bothers me a lot and keeps me from being able to really feel much warmth toward Pope Benedict. I do commend him for going after Maciel and the Legion in the end, but what kept him quiet for the years before that? In the meantime, Maciel was able to inflict more abuse and more harm to the Church.

Again, I am not privy to Vatican politics and realize Benedict may just have been playing the game in the only way he felt possible, but it does not reassure me to think he knew Maciel was a deviant for years and felt his hands were tied to do anything about it. It's very disturbing.

Anonymous said...

I think it's silly to suggest that Ratzinger "knew" for years that Maciel was a deviant. Ratzinger and some others within the Curia no doubt heard some of the rumors about Maciel and were inclined to suspect that those rumors weren't entirely bogus.

Launching an investigation that would conclusively determine the truth was completely impossible in a world in which Maciel supporters (like Sodano at Secretariat of State) had the Pope's ear and all the power.

When it became practical to do -- because of JP II's health -- Ratzinger did, in fact, move against Maciel. And upon becoming Pope he has moved against Maciel and now against the Legion about as fast as anything can possibly move within the Church.

Anonymous said...

I do appreciate the rage so many ex-LCs feel toward those who might have been in a position to stomp Macielism out earlier but failed to do so.

At the same time, it makes no sense to assume that Pope John Paul and Pope Benedict somehow knew about all of this and covered it up. Ex-LCs of all people should understand that. So many people devoted 5, 10, 20 years of their lives to Maciel and his institution, convinced all the while that he was a saint and that allegations against him were just lies by enemies of the Church.

If hundreds of people who were immersed in Maciel's world were snookered by him, what makes you think officials in the Vatican must have known more?

Anonymous said...

Lets face that in the late 90´s is when all the heat on Maciel hit the media. By that time JPII was old and the allegations against Maciel were not substancial enough. I mean, all of us around the Legion didnt beleive anything. Even the acusers said there was no response from the vatican through all those years. Is until that time (late 90´s) when I think Ratzinger began to dig into the case. A complicated case. Just imagine him facing a saint(Maciel) against some people saying all those things against him. Everything was so cloudy at that time. I dont imagine Ratzinger bothering the sick and old JPII about "rumors" on Maciel.
By the time he realized Maciel was not who we all beleived he was, the pope was in his final days.
Also, a lot of cardinals and bishops were on Maciels payroll.
I think JPII never knew about Maciel. He had to trust what he saw. Dont think he is guilty.
And I think Ratzinger was a brave cardinal and even breaver pope.

Anonymous said...

How many years a single sexual abuse case takes to settle to sentence?
Lets say Ratzinger began to hear the acusations in 1997-1998. Then again maybe he heard something else 2 or 3 years later. By that time he put somebody to dig a little bit more. So maybe the case really began around 2002-2003, interviews, collecting proof, etc etc. Its about 6 or 7 years since then. Add a burocratic system like the Vatican. Add corruption, money and the whole LC fighting back... Not a simple case as we see it know(since last february) I beleive it was more complicated than we think. And lets face it, Maciel was a saint until february....for most of us

Anonymous said...

I, Edmond Ritter, give the exact and perfect explanation, absolutely insuperable, of why I did not accept MM to be a pederast until Feb 4, 2009,-- okay nitpickers, it was probably not until the 5th when I had done my own honest research on websites such as this that I accepted the pederasty of our "Saint". Here is the reason. I WAS BRAINWASHED. The holiness and uprightness of the Legion was unquestioned. What happened on Feb 3 is that the Legionary government radically contradicted itself, exploding my delusion.
Any other questions?

Anonymous said...

Mr 9 years of lies: you hate too much! It's poison that will kill you and won't do a darn thing to MM. I believe that MM was so sick and demon possessed, that he was inculpable for his many grave sins, materially considered. He may not have even sinned formally! (Remember that sinning materially means that you do an objectively evil act, but without being aware of what your are doing, so that it is not morally culpable.) This is my poor opinion of course, after reading Espinosa's book, "Los legionarios". According to Espinosa, MM was physically abused by his father and brothers, all mexican machistas. And you know that machismo is the back side of the pederasty coin. Furthermore, his father, in a machista move to make MM "strong", sent him to sleep in cabins or out in the open air with his employees on the ranch. Some of these sexually abused him. And with that, you have all the elements necessary turn a child into a future pederast: violence, the identification of violence with sex, and the infinite, irrational hatred of innocent children because of a pre-rational identification of the innocent child as evil, worthy of being violated and abused. Under this sort of abuse, the human conscience "dissociates": it rips apart internally separating the objective and subjective orders. The abused person thus protects himself from having to cast an evil judgment on himself. MM was victimized long before he victimized others. And as a victim, it is not impossible that he was too damaged to be held accountable by God for all the moral content of his material actions. That tremendous MM, whom you love to hate, may actually be in Heaven! Stop hating so that you may have a chance to heal and arrive there too! For your good! ER

Anonymous said...

Ratzinger's dilemma as I understand it: I can follow my almost certainly correct judgment (that MM is what he is, an abuser and fraud) and disobey the Pope, and scandalize the Church, and even possibly provoke a schism and certainly grave confusion among the faithful; or I can simply obey the Pope, avoid all these great evils, and suffer and pray for the remedy of MM's great evils.
Now there is this spiritual principle: no one is ever condemned for obeying God or his mediators. This is true because God Himself has taken upon Himself responsibility for our actions done in obedience to Him: "He who hear you hears me, and he who hears me hears He Who sent Me". For Protestants, who do not hold to a strong Petrine identification of the Pope as Mediator of Jesus Christ, this would of course be difficult. But Cardinal Ratzinger, like a good Catholic, adhered to this principle, and left the matter in God's Hands and did not disobey. He did the right thing. "Edmond Ritter"

Anonymous said...

ER, you are full of advice for others about salvation, and yet you persist in a congregation founded by someone "demon possessed". As long as you stay in, you are in league with the devil. And now, you do so knowingly. Talis qualis.

Anonymous said...

"But Cardinal Ratzinger, like a good Catholic, adhered to this principle, and left the matter in God's Hands and did not disobey. He did the right thing."

I find this sentiment frightening. Our respect for papal authority is not some magic wand that protects us from any kind of responsibility for using our God-given brains. There have been scoundrels who have held the office of Pope in centuries past, and most likely they told people under them to do things that were wrong. That does not absolve these bad Popes' followers from any kind of responsibility in their wrongdoing. I would not think it would go over well to face Peter at the pearly gates and try to explain why you allowed evil to go on unabated by saying, "But the Pope told me to!"

I know a lot of people say that Legion priests should be absorbed into our dioceses. But I truly don't want that to happen until they have been through some serious deprogramming and reteaching of proper Catholic theology.

Anonymous said...

At this point, and with so many revelations and/or accusations going about, I would not be surprised by anything that comes up. Do not discount or forget the stories (I presume valid) about the lavish gifts bestowed by LC upon Curial members at festivities especially. With that kind of pattern of behavior sometimes goes the opposite, i.e. digging up the dirt on someone who needs to be influenced by that means. I have no knowledge of anything and am making no accusations, but merely sounding a cautionary note.

Anonymous said...

ER: The same phsicology story was told to me by a Legionary. You have to realize they are still brain washing you. I know various phsicologists they all say the legion story about maciel being a victim and a sick person is full of BS.
And im sure superiors are also telling you that his desease didnt affect his mind in order to do good things right?
So we have this rare disease where you dont realize that youe are doing something bad but you clearly know when you are doing something good? Its stupid as it sounds.
They only say that to put MM as a victim, justify his actions and dont let people think of him as the devil he TRULY was. And in the other hand they protect their god inspired "carisma" because for the good things maciel was fully conciuous... get out of there ASAP...

giselle said...

I find "9 years of lies" entirely refreshing. It's the authentic human emotions that have been brainwashed out of the members, and one who has endured that for a long time finds emotions terrifying: in himself and in others. The rage that 9 feels is entirely in keeping with discvering 1/pederasty, 2/lies, 3/sacrilege, and 4/that years of his life were stolen.
It's just a phase, which can be a variety of lengths, but it's essential to healing. It's not hate, but simply acknowledging the truth.
The problem with the members (that those on the outside have identified correctly) is their inability to respond appropriately to grave injustice. 9 is doing just what he should. God bless his journey!

Anonymous said...

Now Giselle, are you going to give Mr 9 years the excuse to be the slave of hatred for the rest of his life? I may remember wrongly, but he has been TEN YEARS outside the evil grasp of the Legion, and STILL he is enthralled? Okay. But he should not give the Clod Clancy the satisfaction of still holding him a slave, a sort of "Legionary" by extension. Tell him to imagine Donny Clod sneering and laughing at him as he reads his mournful entries on this blog. That may stimulate Mr 9 yrs to do something positive about the injustice he suffered.
Frankly speaking, Mr Edmund Ritter.
PS. Yes, the very one who gives free advise, is semi-brain washed, thinks that the UPRA is great, and would love to kick Clod's Culo.

giselle said...

He is not a slave to hatred, but also has only very recently been given the details of his captors. Before that, he couldn't even get the dimensions of his captivity so he was simply "raging against a nebulous machine."

Now with facts, he can name the injuries, assess the damage and own his healing process. When he is ready, he will forgive and move on.

(Being close to several POW's from Vietnam -- some in the Hanoi Hilton -- I've seen rage and its destruction. One man had lived with hatred for many many years, but recently went on his first trip back to Vietnam, engaging in travel and a service project. On this trip, he forgave and got his life back. It was God's time -- and now he's free. You simply cannot control other people's responses or paths.)

Anonymous said...

I, ER, got my psychology from reading independent sources and consulting professionals outside even the Catholic Church. No Legionary idiocies in my sources folks. A professional protestant psychoanalyst looked at correspondence I have had with Legionary superiors and almost shouted at me with shock as she read them: "They are dissociating! They do not address your pointed and important questions!" These superiors, that is, are incapable of moral judgments, they are damaged. As for MM's DID (dissociative identity disorder, or multiple personalities), she said quite firmly, "MM is obviously DID". No room for discussion for her. She is an expert on sects and deprogramming that Paul Lennon at the ReGain website put me onto. She is a pro, through and through. She has helped people in Miles Jesu and other sect-like groups. Is it possible to "deprogram" the Legionaries? She answered "impossible". A programmed person is very difficult to deprogram. And a whole group of them? She does not think the Legion can be saved. She would find plenty of company here on this blog.
I know that humanly speaking, it is absolutely impossible to take the Legionaries and make of them a normal group. But God can do it, for Him, creating the Universe out of nothing, raising the dead and parting the Red Sea: it's all like taking a holiday. This does not mean that I want Him to do it. But with all the negativity on this blog about the LC's prospects, I fear that God may just refound and resurrect the Legion just to spite you, so hold it down!

Anonymous said...

"Raging against a nebulous machine". That is quite exact. I did that for a year. I was being shot at from all directions (I was in the Matrix). I was exasperated and repeatedly hurt. But I held back out of misplaced charity against fiends without pity. But then I read Gonzalez's book, and discovered the LC's abuse of psychology, and the tables are now turned. The visitator will be here in a month, and I and others will have thick dossiers to busy him with.

Anonymous said...

Giselle- thanks for the defense.

Ritter- check out the name of this blog. EXLC. If you are still "LC" then your commetns really don't belong. I don't believe what you write because I don't know an LC who curses, gets online, posts on blogs and isn't Jonny Morris or Tommy Williams the circle jerk material of the LC's trinity Corcuera, Garza and Sada.

It hasn't been 10 years I've been out. It's been a lot less.

So do us a favor- take your MM defense, your loce of a corrupt, depraved institution and your pseudo attempts to placate us to another place. Because if you know what we know, you as an LC, and you DONT feel this rage- then you are still brainwashed. Sorry. You are dude.

Bernie Madoff stole $50 billion and went to jail. MM stole souls, lives, vocations, faith, virginity, youth from countless people. What is his sentence? And if you don't feel that rage buddy boy you are a machine, not a man.

The LC doesn't allow men. Human formation is not human at all. You're proof.

start LCLovers.blog.com and post away.

Anonymous said...

9 years of lies... I wish I could meet you in person & give you a giant hug. You're in my prayers. I agree with everything you say.

Anonymous said...

Uhum... Giselle is obviously a kind lady and helped me understand that you are deeply traumatized. I step back. Relax. Breath deep. NO ONE has attacked you.
Yes, I am probably still brain-washed. That's why I am visiting and talking so much on this blog. The contact and criticism helps my clarity. That's okay, right?
If you think I am not LC, ask Giselle to write to Mr EXLCBlogger and ask who I am? Mr exlc will tell her about me, about how we one day cooked banana cream pie for 400 brothers and fathers in the Roman College. Maybe he will remember our friendly dialogue about maple syrup and corn syrup. I provoked him telling him they were all the same! Wow! That was almost as provocative as whatever I said above to provoke you!
You take it easy Bro., and maybe in a few days you can reread what's above and not see a personal attack or anything that calls for a defense.
Yours, Edmond Ritter

Pete Vere said...

Monsieur Ritter, you still sound rather tormented internally. To help you put some perspective on things, I invite you to click here:


Scroll down, and see if any of these points appears to match your experience. If so, inform your apostolic visitator.

Don said...

Please don't tell "Edmond Ritter" to leave. He provides a perspective as an insider that is vital to these discussions. As to suggesting that he is a Legion defender, he is openly critical of LC leadership and he openly admits that he is still in the process of recovering from years of brain-washing. He fears for his vocation if he leaves (perhaps a symptom of the residuals of brain-washing) and so he stays. In the meantime, he gives us a window into the LC world, and will be available to the AV when the time comes. I don't know how he has such free time and open access to the internet, but thank God that he does.

Don said...

By the way, I'm also glad to see "9 Years of Lies" on this discussion. I agree he has a lot of anger and he swears like a sailor, but that anger gives us an insight into the lasting damage that the LC leaves in its wake. For 9 years he was not able to vent his anger, and buried it deep inside. I hope that these discussions have been therapeutic for him.

Anonymous said...

people with double personality dont chose when to be one person or the other. In Maciels case he wasnt sick. Or did anyone see him in mass with his mustache???
He was aware of what he was doing, and that makes him guilty and a diabolic person.

Anonymous said...

I too am glad to see that Mr. Ritter (Brother Ritter?) is contributing to these discussions, and I hope he is as open to the AV when they come calling. I pray that his will be a courageous voice among so many LCs afraid to speak openly and honestly.

As for 9 Years and any other wounded souls, I hope you have documented your experiences and sent them in to an AV. It may be therapeutic for us all to vent about our bad experiences, but that will do nothing productive. Write your letters, and send them in! Along with prayer, this is the best we can do.


PS Yes, my letter has been sent. Has yours?

Anonymous said...

"But with all the negativity on this blog about the LC's prospects, I fear that God may just refound and resurrect the Legion just to spite you, so hold it down!"

Why in the world would God do something to spite victims of Maciel's molestation? God knows what these victims have gone through and what they feel, whether they shout it from the rooftops or whisper it in their most secret moments.

Maybe you were being facetious, and I just didn't get it. LOL

Anonymous said...

I sent my information to an AV and received his response.

You've got to let me be angry- I am allowed to be angry. And once it is all out of my system, then there may be some "healing". Or justice.

I gave my best years to the LC. I want an apology. I want someone in the LC to fess up- come clean- but they won't. The good ones leave. The rest stay. The bad ones fight for their authority and positions of power.

When's the last time Garza was up till 2:30AM because on a whim some asshole decided he wanted to go on a hike to Bracciano tomorrow? When's the last time he was treated like a fucking slave with work and cooking and cleaning and fixing and then told to pray and study and not read a book or make a call or watch a damn TV show. And all the time they pick their favorites for "merienda de los padres" or "fubito de los padres" or jerk off fest "de los padres".

They treated us like shit and convinced us it was "the cross" or "god's will". And now to know I did these things to protect a rapist? a child molestor? a money launderer?

So please allow me to be angry. Allow my rage. I don't want your sympathy or charity- just your tolerance or my unadulterated rage.

These men lied to me for years. And we quivered before them with respect and obedience. Now I want to blacken their eyes- as black as their souls.

Fuck them all. Oh I wish how I wish to encounter them. Telling Garza to fuck himself would be an honor. Telling Alvaro to suck my cock would be a liberation.

Yes, I am angry and will not forgive them until they are crushed. Bastards.

-9 years of lies

Claire said...

As one who admittedly had only peripheral connection to LC/RC myself but saw a lot for a variety of reasons -- I am beginning to question whether the LCs actually had true vocations to the priesthood. I am wondering whether "the call" came from a diabolical source and not from God at all.