"If you want your sins 'covered' by the Lord (cf. Ps. 32:1), do not display your virtues to others. For whatever we do with our virtues, God will also do with our sins." - St. Mark the Ascetic
It is no secret that the Legion and, necessarily, Regnum Christi have quailed at reporting the failings, or rumoured failings, of their altruistic founder. From an outsider's perspective, Maciel was practically deified by the members of the Legionaries of Christ and Regnum Christi.
They weren't allowed to speak, lest entertain, anything negative about him. Anyone who did bring up some dirt was affectively vilified as slanderous gossipmongers. Additionally, there were official policies that made sure no one spoke ill of Maciel by way of quasi-secretive vows or promises; furthermore, these policies were vehemently denied and labeled as--here is comes again--slanderous lies propounded by jealous orders and disgruntled former members. That is, of course, until Pope Benedict XVI told them not to have such secrets among themselves. Only then were they able to mention that these oaths may have existed, but this was only ever mentioned in passing.
Why couldn't they say anything bad about their Benevolent Founder? What's more, why all the secrets and denials of policies and practices? I can only assume that fear was the basis.
Their entire spirituality and mission was founded on the person and writings of Maciel, but this foundation was so shaky that they had to pretend it was infallible, lest the foundation crumble. They went so far as to shun dissenters--family members or long-time friends who may have "bought into" the so-called lies and rumours propounded by jealous orders (some even named the Jesuits) and former members, who were "obviously bitter"--people who had been blinded by the lure of the devil and unwittingly or not became his tools in the destruction of the Kingdom of God, or so saith the Legion.
That is why St. Mark's above quote, in light of the recent scandal, fits so well--and why the scandal is of no surprise for those of us who have been following the "rumours and lies" for quite some time.
Virtues Extolled; Truth Exposed
For years both Regnum Christi and the Legion tried so hard to keep his reputation spotless that they lost any sense of humanity along the way. They presented a view of sanctity that was based on the person of Maciel but remained shallow, at best--particularly since his antics have become more widely known. They did this by touting his flawless writings and insisting that he was a great man--without hard evidence, only verbal testimony. They extolled his writings and sanctified his character at the same time as they made it impossible to speak--and to think--of his faults.
What we need to remember is that a saint, while on earth, is far from perfect. While holy card depictions may inspire zeal, they often miss the humanity of the person painted. Such was the portrayal of Maciel and the Legionary culture: crisp, pious, spotless men in absolute perfect imitation of The Man, Maciel. However, by focussing so much on outward piety, and making it impossible to even think Maciel could be anything less than flawless, they seemed to have missed the necessity--and countless opportunities--for an internal cleansing.
The Legion was perfect, then, because of the outward piety, the countless vocations, the many apostolates, and the infallible writings and immaculate character of Maciel. In other words, the Legion was holy because of what it did, not because of what it was.
Such a spirituality infers that at long as the outside of the cup is kept clean, there is no need to scrub the grime that became caked onto its inner bowl. It gives this false air which claims that as long as we do stuff in the name of Jesus, he will remember us on the day of judgement (Matthew 7, anyone?).
Look at the bulk of their defence: they insist that we look at the "fruit" of more vocations and countless apostolates (countless, at times, because their members deny having any affiliation with Regnum Christi). While more vocations are superficially a good thing, coupled with this major error in the treatment of Maciel, and his very own lifestyle, one needs to question whether the formation offered to the numerous vocations and countless apostolates bears any substance or genuine conversion. In an exterior conversion, such as what is propounded by the Legion's lack of introspection, there is no Via Crucis, there is no nitty-gritty in this gospel, only outward piety and starched linens.
However, the message of the real Gospel is that Christ came to save the lost--the ones with grass-stains on their jeans, with their left thumb over their right, who bow awkwardly, and who come across as crass or callous. He came for the prostitute, the thief, and the disgraced. He came for you and me in the midst of our human frailty, as we wrestle with our lusts, our greed, and our pride. Ironically, Christ came to save the disgraced Maciel and not the impeccable, deified Maciel.
"For the Son of Man came to seek and to save what was lost" (Luke 19:10).
I understand that the Legion and Regnum Christi would disagree with my characterization of their Gospel message. And I understand that there are a lot of very good, holy people who are members of the Legion and its affiliates. Nonetheless, in their deliberate portrayal of Maciel as a spotless virgin or an unblemished lamb--an inviolate victim--their spirituality became akin to that of the Pharisees and Sadducees during the time of Christ. Yes, an examination of conscience is encouraged, and practiced by most--if not all--of its members, but what use is it if their Founder and the upper echelons of the Order, the primary witnesses of their charism, are nothing more than whitewashed tombs? Of what use is an examination of conscience that is incapable of real self-reflection and genuine immolation?
Accepimus Crucem? Sure, but of what value is a spotless cross to our role in Christ's Redemptive Mission?
