The Pope's Armada

Tragic Death of Marisa Bau

2012-02-16T08:52:00.000-08:00

At the end of January, the shocking and tragic news broke in the Swiss and Italian press that the body of Italian focolarina Marisa Bau, aged 48, who had been missing since before Christmas, had been found in a barn near the Focolare centre at Montet, Swtizerland, where she had been based for the past 15 years. It was not until the farmer who owns the barn moved a bale of hay that her body was revealed hanging from a metal beam. By 2 Febraury, an autopsy and the findings of the police pointed to suicide.

Official statements on the Focolare Movement website accept this possibility. Marisa Bau's family, however reject this explanation on the grounds that suicide would conflict with her Christian beliefs. Prior to the discovery of the body, a high profile appeal for information on the missing woman, spear-headed by the Focolare's official website, seemed to suggest that the movement's leadership was convinced that, whether Bau had left voluntarily or not, she would be found alive. At first the appeals insisted that she had been in good spirits at the time of her disappearance, but gradually there were hints that maybe she had been troubled in some way. She had just returned from a journey to Brazil and was jet-lagged and complaining of a severe headache. While hardly an explanation for suicide in themselves, as the Focolare's official website seem to suggest, short-term disorientation could have aggravated an existing state of mind. If indeed this was suicide - and, if so, circumstances would suggest a firm intention, rather than a cry for help - one can only guess at the depth of despair and isolation she felt. Yet there seems to be no indication that those closest to her were aware of what would have been a profoundly disturbed mental state.

Those unfamilair with the inner workings of the Focolare Movement, might conclude that this would rule out suicide. The final results of the autopsy will not be available for a few weeks and so, for the moment, any explanations must be speculative. Yet from my own experience of leaving the movement, after a number of years as a celibate focolarino with vows, I would suggest that suicide is certainly a possibility despite the lack of obvious motivation.

Like other similar 'New Movements' in the Catholic Church, Focolare encourages an 'angelistic' approach. Whatever extremes of personal anguish they may be feeling, members are encouraged to maintain an impression of smiling serenity, the hallmark of the focolarini, which strikes some observers as attractive and others as zombie-like. Thus even their immediate colleagues might remain unaware of personal problems - which might only be revealed to higher authorities such as the 'capizona', the regional leaders.

Although my exit from Focolare was carried out in agreement with the movements' superiors and through the official channels, right up to the day I left I was still expected to lead meetings. I remember translating recordings of Chiara Lubich's talks and feeling my mind almost literally split in two. The only way I could describe this schizoid state was that it was as though there were a sheet of glass dividing my brain - on one side was my Focolare self, on the other was the self waiting with bated breath to escape. The mental strain was immense.

I know how alone it is possible to feel when you reach a point where to stay in the movement would destroy you, yet outside there appears to be no hope or even damnation, a concept that is ceaselessly drummed into members. To leave the movement would mean betraying and losing all your friends (anyone who has been in the movement for many years has long since forfeited or deliberately cut off any friendships outside its confines) but you also feel that you would be betraying your family by being a bad example and putting the movement in a bad light and you are therefore reluctant to seek their support. For this reason it is highly unlikely that family members would have the least inkling of any problems. Hearing of the long and tragic experiences of others who have left the movement, I consider myself lucky; I had only been 'inside' for 9 years and was only 26 at the time of my exit and therefore still flexible enough to adapt to a new way of life and a new way of looking at the world. Although I never had suicidal feelings, I can remember moments of personal crisis during my time in the movement when I felt on the brink of madness and my behaviour was bizarre and out of character. I can understand that for someone like Bau who had been in the movement for 25 years, failure to measure up to expectations could appear to be unutterable desolation.
Extremes of depression and desperate actions could be possible in such unbalanced moments.

Marisa Bau had been based at the Focolare's village in Montet for the past fifteen years. The atmosphere at these centres is even more intense than in the small Focolare houses based in towns and cities where you at least have contact with the outside world. In these self-sufficient villages or 'towns' of the Movement, members are required to be 'up', in the jargon of the movement, at all times. When I was at Loppiano, the movement's 'town' in Tuscany, I would sometimes wonder if the illusion was not sustained by the suppressed anguish of all the inhabitants. Chiara Lubich herself once said that Loppiano could be a paradise or a terrible prison depending on ones state of mind. Bizarrely, the Focolare authorities sometimes used these centres - whose main purpose was a 'novitiate' for full-time members - as a kind of prison for members with 'problems'. The fact that generally these centres were in physically isolated locations, made them ideal for this purpose. I remember one focolarino at Loppiano at the same time as me - although some years older - who, we were told, was suffering from depression and was tormented with suicidal thoughts. What no one seemed to realise was that Loppiano was probably the last place he should be, with its pressure-cooker atmosphere, likely to aggravate his mental state and any feelings of despair or worthlessness.

When the Vatican were having problems with the African Archbishop Milengo a few years ago, they appointed the focolarini as his 'gaolers' - and very good they were at it too, according to Vaticanologist Sandro Magister of the Italian news weekly L'Espresso. One of the places they took the Archbishop was O'Higgins, the Argentinian equivalent of Loppiano, probably the remotest of all the Focolare centres, in the midst of the pampas, miles away from anywhere. It is easy to see how the intensity and isolation of such an atmosphere could trigger serious depression.

It was also my experience that the shock of leaving this rarified atmosphere even for a short period such as a holiday or visiting family - and Bau had just been on a trip to Brazil on Focolare business - could trigger a sudden crisis, or the flaring up of repressed problems. One was highly susceptible to the 'temptations' of the outside world. Manifestations of sexuality in posters, on television or in films, for instance, which the general population are so used to that they hardly notice them, could have an overwhelming impact on such 'innocents abroad'. Despite the fact that focolarini are exorted to practise 'custody of the eyes', in today's world you would have to walk around blindfolded to do this effectively. Thoughts and feelings which most people would consider normal, could be deeply disturbing and unbalancing for those used to a very sheltered environment.

At least the Focolare Movement has not tried to hush up the facts of Bau's death - which would have been difficult in view of the publicity. Even though they are forbidden to watch TV or buy newspapers, the news would inevitably filter down to internal members. But the response of Maria Voce, the successor to Chiara Lubich as President of Focolare, while sympathetic, is ambiguous and could be understood to deflect blame from the movement. She says that with Bau's death 'we see the Movement more than ever identified with the dramas of humanity today'. The implication could be that somehow Bau was contaminated by 'the world', rather than aknowledging that somehow the demands of the movement could have pushed her over the edge. When I first told the male Focolare leader in the UK that I was gay, his main concern was that I shouldn't blame the movement, an idea that had never entered my mind. There was a knee-jerk reaction to safeguard the institution first and foremost.

If indeed this was a tragic suicide, those closest to Bau, and the leadership of the movement, must surely feel compelled to examine ways in which they may have failed to meet her needs in this crucial moment of personal crisis. Many people both inside and outside the movement, including Bau's family, the civil authorities and - one would hope - the Catholic hierarchy will be asking far-reaching questions. On this occasion, smokescreens of fine spiritual words will not suffice. The one positive thing that could emerge would be an extensive enquiry into the circumstances leading up to Bau's death, including questioning structures and internal procedures as amongst possible causes, and that the results of this enquiry should be made public. If the Focolare Movement does not do this, then hopefully the civil or religious authorities will. In facing up to Marisa Bau's demons, perhaps the Focolare Movement might face up to its own.

Papal Document on New Evangelisation Imminent

2011-11-28T10:19:00.001-08:00

Following recent posts on the Movementisation of the Church, Benedict XVI's focus on New Evangelisation - and thus the new evangelisers in the form of the New Movements - continues apace with the announcement of a forthcoming papal document on the subject. Over the past month, the Pontiff has been meeting with the American bishops on their ad limina visits to Rome. Last week he pointed out to an episcopal group that 'one of the aims of my pastoral visit to the US [in 2008] was to encourage the Church in America to recognise, in the light of dramatic changes in the religious and social spheres, the urgency of the New Evangelistion.' He took the opportunity to inform them that 'with the aim of furthering this goal, I'm planning to present some thoughts in the next few months which I believe you will find useful in the discernment of what you are called to do in your role of guiding the Church in the future that Christ is unfolding for us.'

Rebooting Vatican II - The Movementisation of the Church (Part 2)

2011-11-14T10:20:00.001-08:00

October 2012 marks the 50th anniversary of the start of the Second Vatican Council. Pope Benedict has recently announced two closely-linked events to celebrate that date. On 17th October 2011, he issued a motu proprio entitled Porta Fidei - the doorway to faith - announcing that 11 October 2012 will be the start of a Year of Faith for the whole of the Catholic Church, echoing a similar event launched by Paul VI in 1967 to mark the end of the Council. The second event is the Synod on 'The New Evangelisation for the Transmission of the Christian Faith' to be organised by the newly formed Pontifical Council for Promoting New Evangelisation.

As I reported in my last post, given the key role both Benedict and his predecessor have given to the Movements in the New Evangelisation, one of the aims of the Synod will be to encourage the reception of the charisms of the Movements by the Church as a whole. Addressing an international meeting of bishops in Rome in 2008, Pope Benedict extolled the New Movements as 'a gift of the Lord, a valuable resource for enriching the entire Christian Community with their charisms.' Just as they were for his predecessor John Paul II, for the Pontiff, they are the embodiment of the New Evangelisation with their 'vigorous missionary impetus, motivated by the desire to communicate to all the precious experience of the encounter with Christ, felt and lived as the only adequate response to the human heart's profound thirst for truth and happiness.'

The New Evangelisation is also to be a basic theme of the Year of Faith which, according to the Pope's motu proprio, is to have a strong missionary impetus: 'Today too there is a need for stronger ecclesial commitment to new evangelisation in order to discover the joy of believing and the enthusiasm for communicating the faith.' He calls for the kind of public demonstration at which the Movements excel: 'All ecclesial bodies old and new are to find a way, during this year, to make a public demonstration of the Credo.' Gargantuan events such as the World Youth Day and the Holy Father's Meeting with Families, inspired and animated by the Movements, have become landmarks of the New Evangelisation. No other organisations in the Church can compete at this level: the Year of Faith will offer them opportunities for such high-profile events on a global scale, compressed within a relatively short time-frame. They will grab the headlines and dwarf the efforts of more traditional Catholic groups such as religious orders and parishes.

But what has this got to do with the Second Vatican Council? Vatican II was an epoch-making event in the history of Catholicism. No matter how much of an embarrassment its liberal tone might be to the Vatican's present incumbents, they could hardly afford to ignore this anniversary. But Pope Benedict, who has been outspoken in his criticism of the Council's reforms and its negative influence, has gone one better. With the Synod and the Year of Faith, he is rebooting the Council and making the celebrations into the launching pad for the project closest to his heart - spreading the 'Movement effect' to the whole Church.

Pope Ratzinger is certainly well acquainted with what the Council was all about. He attended as a peritus or expert theological adviser to Cardinal Frings of Cologne. At that time, he was part of the liberal majority. Since then, due to a number of personal and historical factors, his career and views have followed the classic trajectory of the neo-conservative - from forward-looking liberal to backward-looking traditionalist. But he has managed to salvage one positive element from the car-crash of the Council. By some strange alchemy, in Benedict's mind, the New Movements and the Second Vatican Council have become inextricably linked. 'The Ecclesial Movements and New Communities are one of the most important innovations inspired by the Holy Spirit in the Church for the implementation of the Second Vatican Council,' he told the bishops in 2008. 'They spread in the wake of the Council sessions especially in the years that immediately followed it, in a period full of exciting promises but also marked by difficult trials. Paul VI and John Paul II were able to welcome and discern, to encourage and promote the unexpected explosion of the new lay realities which in various and surprising forms have restored vitality, faith and hope to the whole Church.'

In fact this is a re-writing of history because none of the New Movements was actually inspired by the Council. Of the largest and most influential of these organisations, Focolare began in the forties, CL had its roots in the fifties with the Gioventu Studentesca movement of CL founder Don Giussani, and the Neocatechumenate was started in Madrid in the early Sixties while the Council was still in mid-session. Opus Dei, which denies being a movement but which strongly resembles those organisations, actually began in Spain as far back as the twenties and reflects the Catholicism of that era. What all these Movements have in common is their proud boast that they are precursors of Vatican II, that in some way they foresaw it. Unlike the traditional religious orders, therefore, that recognised the need for radical self-examination and reform in the spirit of the Council, the New Movements complacently decided that had no need to change in the Post-Conciliar period.

It is well known that, as Cardinal Ratzinger, Benedict saw the reforms that followed Vatican II as excessive, even erroneous. In the reign of John Paul II, he spear-headed a process of Restoration, turning back the clock on some of the Council's key reforms and certainly on its spirit of openness to the world and other Christian denominations. So bitter were his feelings towards the Council that in one notable interview he pronounced the New Movements 'the only good thing to come out of the Council'.

In reality Benedict's principal concern is to stem the tide of secularisation in the countries of Europe which have been traditionally Christian. On many occasions he has declared that the rot set in with the Enlightenment - two centuries ago. This world-view has more in common with that of the First Vatican Council rather than the Second. The Council of Pio Nono was called to supply 'an adequate remedy to the disorders, intellectual and moral, of Christendom', which sounds very much like what Benedict is seeking today. The orientation of the Second Vatican Council of Pope John XXIII on the contrary explicitly set out not to condemn but to find common ground with, and look for the good in, the modern world - of which Pope John saw a great deal such as the desire for peace, equality and tolerance, and such values as freedom of speech and conscience. To suggest that the conservative New Movements which, together with Benedict XVI, view the modern world, and Europe in particular, as a moral wasteland, are the first fruits of Second Vatican Council is to stand the true meaning of that historic event on its head.

'How is it possible,' Benedict XVI pointed out to the bishops in his 2008 speech, 'not to realize...that [the] newness [of the Movements] is still waiting to be properly understood in the light of God's plan and of the Church's mission in the context of our time? The important task [is to promote] a more mature communion of all the ecclesial elements, so that all the charisms, with respect for their specificity, may freely and fully contribute to the edification of the one Body of Christ.' This is Pope Benedict's goal. The not-so-hidden agenda of the Synod on 'The New Evangelisation for the Transmission of the Christian Faith' and the Year of Faith to be held in its wake, therefore, is a nothing other than a more sweeping Movementisation of the Church?

Ad Hominem attacks - the weapon of weakness

2011-11-11T11:38:00.001-08:00

For anyone who keeps up with comments on the focolare.net website, the leading website for ex-members of the Focolare Movement, it is striking that hardly any former member dares reveal their identity. For me this is a devastating indictment against Focolare - revealing the powerful culture of fear it has instilled in members and which endures long after they have left the organisation.

Fear of what? Physical reprisals? Unlikely. Attempts to silence them by threats or persuasion? Possibly.
I believe, however, that the roots of this fear reach far deeper - it is a nameless, irrational horror cultivated in members of the fate awaiting those who fall away. I remember how, when ex-members - especially those who had been in authority - left the movement, they would be spoken of in hushed tones as lost. They were the rotten apples, in foundress Chiara Lubich's words, that would infect the barrel. Lurid tales were told of how low they had sunk. The ultimate success of oppression is when the victims internalise it - self-hating gays, women who submit to laws that subjugate them, those who are downtrodden by caste or class systems and connive with their oppressors. This is evident in those who leave the movement and secretly retain the belief fed to them in their years inside that all outside it are somehow lacking and those who leave are evil or even damned.

But there is a more concrete weapon that Focolare and other similar Catholic movements employs against ex-members who go public with their criticisms, as I learned when The Pope's Armada was published. It is that form of character assassination know as the ad hominem argument, when the character of the messenger is attacked rather than the message. Apart from being fallacious, this is the argument of weakness - the last resort of those who know they are unable to counter criticism.

In my case, the first sign of what was to come occurred even before The Pope's Armada was published. The British weekly newspaper The Catholic Herald ran a front page story announcing that a critical book on the New Catholic Movements was about to be published in the United Kingdom and I was its author. Immediately, my mother received a phonecall from an English focolarina who I had encountered both socially and professionally long after leaving the movement (we both worked in the media) and who knew that I was gay and had met my partner. Anyone who knows the internal workings of Focolare would realise that this would be done with the backing of the highest authority. She quizzed my mother about the contents of the book - fruitlessly, as my mother knew nothing at that time - and then repeatedly asked her, 'Is Gordon still with *****?' As at that time I had not yet come out to my mother (she was still recovering from years of serious depression), this caused her great distress. At best this was pointless mischief-making, at worst a kind of blackmail - as if signaling what the movement was prepared to do to blacken my name. It must have come as a shock when they read the book and found that I was totally open about being gay. I had anticipated such attacks and decided that the best weapon was complete openness for my story to make sense and indeed my sexuality was central to the account of my mistreatment at the hands of the movement. I had rightly decided that the best way to counter such an organisation - which thrives on secrecy - was to go public, withholding none of the salient facts.

Interestingly, a Vatican Cardinal, when asked if he would allow me to interview him for an article I was writing, told me that he had been 'very disappointed' in The Pope's Armada. My criticisms, he opined, should have been limited to the private sphere, within the confines of the Catholic Church. Such advice now sounds hollow, even sinister after all the paedophile coverups of recent years. But it illustrates the mind-set of Rome - don't hang out your dirty linen in public. There is another reason why the Cardinal's remark was disingenuous: the Vatican deliberately ignores the evidence of ex-members of organisations. Some years ago I interviewed the postulator of the cause of Saint Jose Maria Escriva, founder of Opus Dei. The postulator was a priest member of Opus Dei (one of the changes Pope John Paul II had made to speed up the canonisation process was not to have an independent postulator and also to abolish the Devil's Advocate, whose task was to do his best to oppose the candidate's canonisation). This priest told me he had been 'very frightened' (his words) that ex-members might come forward with evidence against Escriva. He breathed a sigh of relief when the Cardinal who presided over the Congregation for Canonisations informed him that they had a policy of ignoring the evidence of ex-members.

The reaction of Focolare to the publication of The Pope's Armada lacked the refinement of the Vatican. They forbade members of the movement from reading it, backing up the ban with unrestrained ad hominem attacks, designed to undermine my credibility. They were told that I was a homosexual, had been to see a psychiatrist and was divorced. The majority of the population, at least in western society, would probably respond, 'So what?' For the sheltered members of the Focolare Movement, however,these accusations would be deeply shocking. The irony, however, was that all these points were mentioned by me in the book. Indeed, I had been sent to see a psychiatrist by my superiors in the movement in the hope that they could change my sexual orientation and marriage had also been their suggested solution - so they were to some extent implicated in my divorce as well! Subsequently, these accusations have been elaborated into libelous allegations such as one that I read in a comment on focolare.net that I had 'abandoned' my wife and 'three' children ( I have two, as far as I am aware, and still enjoy a close and rewarding relationship with them). Of course, none of these accusations have any bearing on the truth or otherwise of The Pope's Armada.

Such attacks were aided and abetted by traditionalist Catholic journalists. When The Pope's Armada was first published in the UK, it had the misfortune of being reviewed in two quality daily newspapers by prominent Catholic writers well to the right of the Catholic spectrum. One, a novelist and traditionalist Catholic, compared me to ex-nuns and monks in the 19th century who wrote salacious, largely fictional, accounts of their supposed experiences in Catholic religious orders. These accounts were probably the work of militantly anti-Catholic Protestants. The implications was that my book was also a work of fiction written with a similar purpose. I don't think any self-respecting journalist would attempt a trick like this today, but at that time the New Movements were largely unknown, even among Catholics. Nevertheless, this was just a more subtle, seemingly erudite, version of an ad hominem attack and equally weak as it did nothing to counter the facts revealed in the book. Obviously these rather over-zealous right-wing Catholics were anxious to defend Pope John Paul II - who had been such a keen supporter of the movements - and avert scandal.

Most critical reviews of exposes written by ex-members of Catholic Movements (eg Opus Dei) employ the same argument: ex-members are not to be believed because they are just settling old scores This was dramatically disproved in the case of Vows of Silence which exposed the crimes of Father Maciel, founder of the Legionaries of Christ - indeed it opened a can of worms and the truth turned out to be much worse. I believe this is the case with the New Movements. They are so impenetrable, only ex-members have had access to the evidence. The Pope's Armada also opened a can of worms and since I wrote the book I have heard many more stories, all much worse than anything that appeared in the original British edition of the book. It is important that these stories should be told in full and without fear. I can understand that for many ex-members the thought that their most intimate secrets, confided to groups or individuals while they were members, might be made public would be a source of concern. But I am convinced that the best weapon of those who have suffered at the hands of the Movements and experienced their worst aspects is total openness - ultimately far stronger than their weak, cowardly and, above all, deeply un-Christian ad hominen attacks.

'A Giant Awakens - The Movementisation of the Church (Part 1)

2011-11-02T08:36:00.000-07:00

In a previous post on the foundation of The Pontifical Council for Promoting New Evangelisation last year (July 2010), I pointed out that, for the first time, the Vatican was providing an official, tailor-made, centralised structure for the New Catholic Movements. Both John Paul II and Benedict XVI had taken every opportunity to express their enthusiasm for the New Movements - particularly at their vast Pentecost meetings with members of the Movements in 1998 and 2006. The Movements had also been favoured in a less visible but more significant way with many appointments of members to official Vatican bodies such as the Pontifical Councils, Academies and Vatican Congregations. The new structure, however, will mean that the power of the New Movements can be harnessed more effectively than ever to Vatican-led projects so that the New Movements and the official Church become virtually synonymous. As I predicted over fifteen years ago in The Pope's Armada, the New Movements permit the Vatican to act at grass-roots level on a global scale. They provide access to every aspect of civil society through the action of lay men, women and children, who do not necessarily disclose their allegiance to the Vatican.

Given that Cardinal Ratzinger had been a vocal supporter of the Movements as John Paul II's theologian-in-chief, even to the extent of hailing them as the only good thing to come out of the Second Vatican Council, it was always on the cards that consolidating their position within the structure of the Church would be the keynote of his reign as Benedict XVI. Unlike John Paul's 'charismatic' and rather piecemeal approach to his various enthusiasms, Benedict's moves have been slower and more considered, but likely to have more impact in the long run (and of course a traditionalist like Benedict is well aware that the Church thinks and acts 'in centuries'). With his latest pronouncements, it can be said that the Movementisation of the Catholic Church is underway, confirming what the Pontiff once suggested - also while still a Cardinal - that today belonging to a Movement is the most effective way - not to say the only way - to be a Catholic.

On 17th and 18th October, the new Council held a meeting in Rome which brought together members of 33 episcopal conferences with 400 representatives of New Movements and ecclesial communities. Numbers were swelled by 10,000 younger members of the Movements. The Pope met briefly with the delegates on the first afternoon of the event and the next day for mass, hailing them as the 'new evangelisers'. The President of the Council, Archbishop Fischiella, briefed the gathering on the new organisation's aim of countering secularistion both inside and outside the Church - even among the clergy! - via an explicit proclamation of the gospel. In his speech on 17th October, Benedict reiterated his desire that the primary field of mission should be the traditionally Christian countries - i.e. 'de-Christianised' Europe.

Leaders of the Movements - including Kiko Arguello, founder of the Neocatechumenate, Father Julian Carron, leader of Communion and Liberation, Adriano Roccucci of San Egidio, and Salvatore Martinez of Renewal in the Spirit - had a high profile at the event, addressing the delegates and greeting the Council's initiative enthusiastically. A report on the conservative website Zenit, bullishly entitled its report on the meeting, 'A Giant is Awakening - New Evangelisation Flows Out of Rome'.

The establishment of the new Council has been followed by an even more significant papal pronouncement - that next years Synod of Bishops will have as its subject 'New Evangelisation for the Transmission of the Christian Faith'. Speaking of the aims of the Synod on the first anniversary of the new Council last July, its President, Archbishop Fisichella, said 'We must try to give a unity to all this...listening to all these ecclesial realities - old and new - that, in these last years, have rolled up their sleeves and really implemented these methodologies of new evangelisation with great results.'

It is above all the effectiveness of the methods of the New Movements that has endeared them to Rome. The Vatican has already learned a few lessons from these organisations and imitated their methods with spectacular success. The vast World Youth Days and the Meeting of the Holy Father with Families were inspired by Focolare's Genfests and Familyfests respectively, both of which John Paul II experienced first hand, and have been hailed as quintessential examples of the new evangelisation. More recently, Benedict XVI cited Focolare's business venture, the Economy of Communion as an example to be followed in his encyclical Caritas in Veritate. He has also recently called for dialogue with non-believers, another concept borrowed from Focolare. The first practical initiative of the new Council will be the Metropolis Mission, which will target 11 major European cities during Lent 2012. This draws directly on the experience of the New Movements which have shown themselves particularly effective in urban settings. As Archbishop Fisichella has emphasised, the 'new evangelisation cannot be carried out...without new evangelisers' - ie the Movements.

This is stage one of Rome's plans for mobilising the Movements as its front line in the battle against secularisation. In my next post, I will outline stage two - even more sweeping, involving the entire Chruch.

Rome must respect its own laws

2011-10-25T14:58:00.000-07:00

October 2011 The Apostolic Visitation of the Regnum Christi movement - the lay off-shoot of the Legionaries of Christ order - has just been concluded. Such a major investigation is usually carried out only in grave circumstances, when the Vatican suspects or has proof of, serious deviation within a religious congregation or association in the Church. In this case it was the overwhelming evidence of, according to a Vatican communique issued in 2010, 'the very serious and objectively immoral behaviour of Father Maciel [the Mexican founder of Regnum Christi and the Legionaries of Christ, which] sometimes resulted in actual crimes, and manifests a life devoid of scruples and of genuine religious sentiment.'

For years, the Vatican swept aside well-documented accusations from former priests and seminarians of the Legionaries who claimed to have been sexually abused by Maciel. Not only did these prove to be well-founded, but it was also established that he had fathered children by at least two women, while masquerading as the saintly Founder of the order. (See Vows of Silence: The Abuse of Power in the Papacy of John Paul II by Jason Berry and Gerald Renner) Maciel's chief protector was John Paul II who was a great admirer of the priest and his traditionalist order and lay association. Benedict XVI, who as Cardinal Ratzinger headed the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith to whom the complaints had been addressed, was fully aware of the serious accusations and the compelling evidence to back them up but took no action during John Paul's lifetime. Apparently offending the Pope or his favourites outweighed the horrific wrongs that had been done to generations of boys and young men who had joined the Legionaries of Christ in good faith. Clearly it was felt that the good done by these organisations outweighed any wrong-doing and there was a danger of harming their reputation. To give Benedict his due, one of his first actions in office was to take action against Maciel personally and later to authorise the Apostolic Visitations of the Legionaries of Christ and Regnum Christi.

Given the gravity of the accusations and the publicity they had received - particularly through the book Vows of Silence - and the high profile of the Legionaries and its close association with the late Pontiff, Rome could hardly justify delaying such an investigation any longer. Furthermore since this particular scandal involved the abuse of children, an issue which has convulsed the Church worldwide and severely damaged the Church's credibility, it had to be addressed sooner or later. Other New Catholic Movements have also been the subject of complaints to Rome, often from authoritative figures such as local bishops, but, as they concerned less controversial and high-profile issues such as divisions in parishes and families , alleged brain-washing, secrecy, unreasonable demands for money etc., it was easier for Rome to sweep them under the carpet and indeed pressurise the local churches into accepting the Movements. It would be fascinating to see what aberrations a Vatican enquiry would unearth in these other organisations. One complaint that was levelled at Regnum Christi by the Apostolic Visitation, for example, was that superiors pressurised members into manifesting their consciences, that is into revealing secrets that properly belong in the context of confession. This is in direct contravention of article 630 of Canon Law which states that 'Superiors...are forbidden in any way to induce the members to make a manifestation of conscience to themselves'. In my experience this was the norm in the Focolare Movement and indeed, in the process of leaving the movement I was expected to do so with a number of authority figures to my considerable distress. In a more recent case, a member of Focolare who confessed to a superior that he had homosexual experiences in the past was summoned before a kind of kangaroo court at the Centre of the Movement in Rome and bombarded with questions on the nature of his sexual feelings and temptations. I have heard from members of the Neocatechumenate that this kind of public examination on intimate matters of conscience is commonplace.

It would be interesting to put together a dossier of just how common this practice is within the New Movements and I would welcome any experiences that former members would be willing to share. Identities would, of course, be safeguarded where necessary.

E Gesu Pianse (Italian translation of post 'Jesus Wept')

2010-07-19T06:53:00.000-07:00

Gesu pianse...

Secondo un'articolo che e apparso in un'edizione speciale del giornale cattolico italiano Avvenire (19 marzo 2008) per segnalare la morte di Chiara Lubich, 'Hanno [i focolarini] deciso, "Niente lacrime a Roma [ai funerali della Lubich] perche non e morta. Vive per sempre in tutti noi." ' Piuttosto che dare una testimonianza della vita eterna ai milioni che hanno seguito la trasmissione in diretta su RAI 1 o sull'internet (e si suppone che questo era l'intenzione dei capi focolarini) questo atteggiamento stoico ha prestato una strana atmosfera di disagio agli avvenimenti. Un mio amico che non ha mai avuto contatti col movimento ma e familiare con le sue idee, mi ha detto che gli sembrava che i membri erano cosi abituati a ricevere ordini su come sentire e reagire che in queste circostanze straordinarie non sapevano come reagire affatto. In realta, avevano ricevuto istruzioni precisi su come comportarsi ed era questo che ha dato alla ceremonia l'aria di stranezza e distacco.

Io invece, un ex-membro che sente ancora affetto per tanti membri dell'Opera e certamente per la fondatrice - nonostante le mie tante obiezioni alle pratiche del movimento - era commosso fino al pianto e l'ho trovato molto strano che quelli che si vantano di essere i suoi seguaci piu fedeli sono rimasti impassivi. Solo don Oreste Basso, uno dei primi focolarini ed il 'co-presidente' del movimento dei Focolari, ha avuto un momento di commozione quando ha ringraziato i pezzi grossi presenti nel suo ruolo di rappresentate dell'Opera. Ma dall'altra parte, i vecchi hanno la tendenza alle lacrime ed e riuscito in poco tempo a calmarsi. Le prime compagne di Chiara, Eli Folonari e Graziella de Luca, invece hanno scherzato insieme fuori la Basilica dopo la ceremonia come fosse stata una Giornata od una Mariapoli molto riuscita.

I funerali della Lubich hanno messo in rilievo uno dei difetti piu grossi del movimento dei Focolari: la pressione sui membri di distaccarsi dalle loro emozioni. In questo caso, la pressione era cosi forte che la reazione spontanea della maggioranza dell'umanita in circostanze simili era assente. Suor Madeleine, fondatrice delle Piccole Sorelle di Gesu, disse una volta che prima di essere cristiani bisogna essere umani; ma questo e piuttosto difficile per i focolarini per i quali il termine stesso 'umano' e negativo!

I psicologi direbbero che il distacco dai propri sentimenti promosso dal movimento e patologico e molto pericoloso per la salute mentale. Difatti, puo darsi che questo sia la causa principale della depressione e malattia mentale che e cosi comune nel movimento a tutti livelli. Adesso che e scomparsa la fondatrice, un'indagine aperta e profonda su questo aspetto potrebbe essere di grande aiuto sia per i membri correnti sia per gli ex.

La vera buona novella non e certa una recetta per la malattia mentale. Se e veramente parola di Dio, deve essere proprio l'opposto. Mi ricordo, durante il mio soggiorno a Loppiano, del funerale di una ragazzina, figlia di focolarini sposati, che si e spenta in seguito ad una malattia ereditaria molto dolorosa. C'era un'amtosfera di celebrazione maniacale e neanche i genitori o fratelli hanno mostrato il minimo segno di tristezza o di lutto.

Mi domandai allora, ed mi sono domandato durante gli anni successivi, perche nessuno si e accorto che questo e lo stile dei focolarini e non del vangelo. Gesu era certamente in contatto con le sue emozioni e non temeva di mostrarle apertamente. In particolare, pianse sulla morte di Lazzaro, anche se doveva sapere che possedeva il potere di fargli risorgere.

Questo e sicuramente la reazione buona, umana alla morte di una persona cara. Ed e questo il cuore del problema. Cos'e la natura dell'amore predicato dai focolarini se e cosi disincarnato che sente nessuna reazione alla morte di una che ama al punto di essere pronto a morire per ella? Nella vita, come nella morte, la reazione alla perdita di amici che si suppone di essere cari e ugualmente fredda - come nel caso di membri che lasciano il movimento per esempio. E possibile che l'amore vero e compatibile con un tale mancanza di emozione?

Mi ha turbato per molto tempo che la virtu evangelica della compassione non trovava posto fra gli insegnamenti del movimento. Ma leggiamo che Gesu aveva compassione sulla folla e che pianse su quello che stava per avvenire a Gerusalemme. Si paragonava perfino ad una gallina che raccoglie i pulcini intorno a se: un'immagine piena di tenerezza ed emozione. Ma come possiamo aspettare che i foclarini riescono a 'sentire' o 'soffrire' con gli altri se mancono cosi tanto di fiducia nei sentimenti? Mi ricordo come, poco temo dopo essere uscito dal focolare, era commosso da un programma all TV, o forse era un film, che mi fece piangere per la prima volta in quasi dieci anni - il periodo durante il quale facevo parte del movimento. Non mi ero commosso in tutti quegli anni, ma di colpo i miei sentimenti erano liberati dalla loro prigione.

Ma com'e possibile obbedire al commandamento di Gesu 'Piangete con quelli che piangono' se non riusciamo a piangere noi stessi? Piuttosto che seguire la linea stoica dei focolarini, preferisco prendere la via indicata da Gesu: 'Beati quelli che fanno cordoglio perche saranno consolati.'

Jesus Wept...

2010-07-19T06:48:00.000-07:00

(This is an article I wrote immediately after watching the live internet broadcast of the funeral of Chiara Lubich, Founder of the Focolare Movement.)

According to an article that appeared in a special edition of the Italian Catholic daily Avvenire (19 March 2008) to mark the death of Chiara Lubich, ‘They [the focolarini] decided, “No tears in Rome [at Chiara’s funeral] because she is not dead. She lives for ever in all of us.” ' Rather than giving a witness to the millions who followed the live broadcast on Italian television or the internet feed - which was presumably what the Focolare old guard intended - this stoical approach lent an eerie atmosphere of uncertainty to the proceedings. A friend of mine who has had no contact with focolare but is familiar with its ethos, had the impression that the members were so used to being told what to feel and how to react that in these unprecedented circumstances they simply didn’t know what the appropriate response should be. In reality, they had been instructed exactly how to behave and it was this very fact that gave to the event its strange, unengaged quality.

As an ex-member who still feels affection for members of the movement and certainly for Chiara, despite my many criticisms of the organisation, I was moved to tears by the funeral and found it odd that those who profess themselves to be her most devoted followers remained dry-eyed. Only Oreste Basso, one of the first focoalrini and the ’Copresident’ of Focolare, broke down when he approached the altar to thank the distinguished guests on behalf of the movement, but then old men are notoriously prone to tears and he struggled successfully to regain his composure. Chiara’s first companions Eli Folonari and Graziella de Luca, on the other hand, had a jolly chat outside the basilica at the end of the funeral as though they had just concluded a successful Day Meeting.

Chiara Lubich’s funeral shone a very public spotlight on one of the Focolare Movement’s most serious shortcomings: the detachment from feelings encouraged in members. In this case, it was so strong that the spontaneous reaction most human beings would experience in such circumstances was absent. Sister Madeleine, founder of the Little Sisters of Jesus, once said that in order to be Christian, it is necessary to be human first; but that is rather difficult in the Focolare Movement in which ‘human’ is a negative term.

Psychologists would say that the detachment from ones emotions that this Movement promotes is pathological and dangerous. Indeed, it could well be the principal reason for the prevalence of depression and mental illness to be found in Focolare from the top down. Now that the Founder is dead, current and former members of the movement would benefit greatly from a probing and truthful investigation into this aspect.

The genuine gospel message is certainly not a recipe for mental illness . If it is truly God’s Word, it should be just the opposite. I remember attending the funeral of a child at Loppiano, the daughter of married focolarini, who had died after suffering terribly from a painful congenital illness. The atmosphere was one of manic rejoicing and not even the parents or siblings let slip any indications of sadness or mourning.

I wondered then, and I have wondered down the years, why no one pointed out that this is the Focolare approach and certainly not that of the gospel. Jesus was very much in touch with his emotions and did not shrink from showing them in public. In particular, he wept over Lazarus’ death, even though he must have known he had the power to raise him up.

This is surely the good, human reaction to the loss of a loved one. And here is the nub of the problem. What exactly is the nature of the love that Focolare preaches if it is so disembodied, so disincarnate, that it feels no reaction to the loss of someone one claims to have loved to the point of being ready to lay down ones life for them? In life, as in death, the reaction to the loss of close friends is remarkably cold - as in the case of members who leave the movement for example. Can real love be compatible with such a lack of feeling?

I have long been troubled that the gospel virtue of compassion was never mentioned in Focolare teachings. Yet we read that Jesus had compassion on the multitude and that he wept over the fate of Jerusalem. He even compared himself to a mother hen gathering her chicks: a more tender and emotion-filled image would be hard to find. Yet how can the focolarini be expected to ‘feel’ or ‘suffer’ with others if they mistrust feelings so much. I remember how, shortly after leaving Focolare, I was moved by a television programme or a film which made me weep for the first time in nearly ten years. My emotions had been released from their prison. How can we obey Jesus’ command to ‘Weep with those who weep’ if we are unable to weep ourselves? Rather than follow the stoical line of the movement, I prefer to follow the path that Jesus indicated: ‘Blessed are those who mourn for they shall be comforted.

New Pontifical Council: in the midst of scandal, the New Movements more than ever the Great White Hope of the Vatican

2010-07-07T11:09:00.000-07:00

On 28th June, Pope Benedict XVI announced the foundation of the first new Vatican organisation of his reign, indeed the first of its kind to be created in a quarter of a century. This year has seen what has probably been one of the most difficult periods in the history of the modern papacy. A beleaguered Vatican has struggled to respond to accusations from around the world relating to the paedophile priests scandal and attempts to hush it up. The Pontiff himself has been implicated - both when he was an archbishop in Germany and subsequently Prefect of the Vatican's Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith - in moves to save the Church's face and the skins of those accused. The Catholic hierarchy - and even the Vatican itself - is facing high profile legal action in a number of countries of the world. This is a scandal that is likely to go on causing serious difficulties for the Church and undermining its authority for years to come.

Against this background, the announcement of a new Vatican body, marks an unexpected and bullish change of direction in the Ratzinger papacy - or perhaps a determined effort by Benedict XVI to get his pontificate back on message and achieve what he always had in mind.

The organisation will be known as the Pontifical Council for New Evangelisation and its principal aim will be a cause which was already an over-riding concern of Jozef Ratzinger when he was still the Cardinal Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith - to combat the rising tide of secularism in Europe and the Americas, particularly in the former strongholds of Catholicism. The announcement is nothing less than a mission statement, responding as it does to new legislation which has come into force in recent month in traditionally Catholic countries. When visiting the pilgrimage centre of Fatima, Portugal, in May, in a speech to a crowd of half a million faithful, Benedict denounced the legalising of gay marriage in that country - it had just been signed into law by the President - as an 'insidious and dangerous' threat. In June a new liberal abortion law came into effect in Spain.

The creation of the new Vatican institution gives a clear signal that Pope Benedict's pontificate is back on track. A firm line has been drawn in the sand. But, in fact, this has been the Pontiff's aim from the start of his pontificate: the very choice of the name Benedict recalls the saint responsible for the re-Christianisation of Europe in a much earlier age. Just a day before his predecessor died, the then Cardinal Ratzinger delivered a speech condemning European secularism and analysing its historical roots. Significantly he chose Subiaco - the cradle of the Benedictine order - as the location for his statement. To underline its import still further, the occasion was his acceptance of the St Benedict Award for the promotion of life and the family in Europe.

The vehicle that Benedict has chosen for his new foundation is significant. The Pontifical Councils were created by John Paul II in the eighties in a major shakeup of Vatican structures. Their aim was to circumvent the lumbering bureaucracy of the Church's central government. The Councils were to be task-forces ready to strike instantly at any point of the globe at a word from the Pontiff - his praetorian guard. At the time there were 11 such organisations and, though many of them were based on existing bodies, each was concerned with an issue or group of particular concern to John Paul such as the Family, the Laity, Justice and Peace or - the only Council he created from scratch - Health Workers. It is a sign of the pro-active, practical nature that Benedict envisages for his new body that he has placed it within this category.

For anyone familiar with the New Catholic Movements, the term 'new evangelisation' will strike an immediate chord. As I pointed out in my book The Pope's Armada, first published in the United Kingdom in 1995, not only did this term become the rallying cry of Pope John Paul II's reign - a fact acknowledged by Pope Benedict in his speech announcing the foundation of the new Council - but it also became synonymous with the evangelising movements that were so dear to John Paul's heart. Vast papal rallies such as the World Youth Day and the Pope's Meeting with Families, which became the defining examples of the 'new evangelisation', were in fact based on similar events created by the New Movements.

There is every reason to believe that the formation of this new body in the Roman Curia signifies a central role for the movements in Pope Ratzinger's vision for the future of the Church. Firstly it was Ratzinger, theologian in chief of the reign of John Paul II, who provided the theological underpinning for the New Movements and their special bond with the papacy. According to the ranzingerian interpretation, only the Pope could recognise such new groups within the Church - as was the case with the mendicant orders of the Middle Ages - and thus at a stroke, he silenced the loud objections of local bishops who feared the disruptive influence of the Movements within the traditional structures of diocese and parish, and harnessed their tremendous power (both spiritual and material) to the throne of Peter. The movements and the papacy gave each other legitimacy and renewed force. If a new centralisation had been a key feature of the reign of John Paul, following the tendency to de-centralisation in the post-Conciliar years, Ratzinger had been its chief architect. The Movements had been placed firmly within this vision of Catholicism.

Secondly, when Benedict came to power, he talked repeatedly of a slimmed-down Church shorn of its dissenting or fringe members, but renewed in commitment and conviction: he seemed to be describing the New Movements. This was underlined when one of his first actions in office was to summon a meeting of these organisations for Pentecost 2005, identical to one of the largest and most significant gatherings of his predecessor's reign when that Pontiff met with the Movements in St Peter's Square on the feast of Pentecost 1998.

Thirdly, in the wake of the recent scandals in which the Catholic priesthood and even the hierarchy have been demonised by the press and in public opinion, this is the perfect moment to place lay movements centre-stage. Fifteen years ago, I pointed out in The Pope's Armada that John Paul II had sidelined the traditional religious orders, which he saw as rebellious and recalcitrant, in favour of the New Movements. Since then, these organisations have consolidated their position in the Vatican corridors of power, with members appointed to key roles in all the major Vatican bodies. On the other hand, many of those involved in the paedophile scandals have been members of the traditional religious orders. Indeed one of the most shocking and high-profile scandals of all involved Father Marcial Maciel Degollado, the Mexican founder of one of the newest religious orders, the Legionaries of Christ, much beloved of John Paul II. Not only was he addicted to prescription drugs and systematically sexually abused young boys for decades in the many seminaries he had set up to provide vocations to his order, but after his death in 2008, it turned out that he had secretly fathered children to at least two women. If ever there was a time it was in the Church's interest to switch attention from the clergy and religious and onto the laity, this is it.

Clearly the Movements are not unaware of the role they can play in improving the Church's image at this time of crisis. On 16th of May 2010, tens of thousands of their members converged on St Peter's Square for the Pope's traditional Sunday lunchtime appearance for the Angelus, to demonstrate their solidarity with the See of Peter. 200,000 members of the movements packed the Square in an orchestrated show of strength of which only these organisations are capable. The Pope was visibly moved and the press was impressed - dubbing the event Papa Day. And perhaps the Movements are also aware of a golden opportunity they have been offered to claim their position as 'The New Protagonists' of the Catholic Church, as they were designated in the title of a critical book written about them by a Rome-based theologian in the 1990s.

So it does not come as a huge surprise to discover a direct link between the new Council and the Movements. According to a report in the Italian daily Il Giornale written in April this year, accurately predicting the creation of the new Vatican organisation, it had first been suggested to Pope John Paul II in the early 1980s by Father Luigi Giussani, founder of the Communion and Liberation Movement. It was once again suggested just over a year ago to the current Pontiff by the highest placed member of that movement, Cardinal Angelo Scola, the Patriarch of Venice, who could well be a candidate for the next pope. This time the suggestion was seized on with enthusiasm by the Vatican's new incumbent. It is known that, while favourable to all the Movements, Pope Benedict has always found Communion and Liberation most congenial to his intellectual and traditionalist approach. He has remained supportive despite the organisation's sometimes questionable antics in Italian politics, especially in the 1990s, and was even instrumental in restoring good relations with Church's central government. It was Cardinal Ratzinger who represented the Vatican at the funeral of Father Giussani in 2005, presiding over the requiem mass and delivering the eulogy. The papal household is currently run by a group of women from Communion and Liberation's branch of consecrated members, the Memores Domini.

Till now, the New Movements have been lumped together with the rest of the Catholic laity under the aegis of the Pontifical Council for the Laity. Now it could be said that they finally have a Council tailored to their goals. It will be fascinating to watch the developments of the new body over the coming months as, against the disarray and scandal among the clergy and the hierarchy, the New Movements more than ever come into their own.