Introduction
My name is Devin Rose, and I have compiled a chronological history of the important events in the Legion of Christ and in the life of its founder, Fr. Maciel, now deceased, as it pertains to the accusations that were made against him during his life at various times.
I joined Regnum Christi, the ecclesial movement of the Legion of Christ, in July of 2007–after all of the following events had occurred, and I first made this document on February 4, 2008.
Picture of me in Venice
I have made this document of my own accord; no one from the Legion nor Regnum Christi has asked me to make it. I am responsible for it entirely, though all the information I compiled is freely available to anyone. I made the document because it was so hard to piece together the story from all the different sources; now it is all in one place so it can be read easily for people who are interested.
I submitted this document to my Legionary spiritual director and received his approval to keep it online.
The document contains a timeline of the events and then my analysis afterwards. This page is open to comments, however the comments must be:
- charitable
- if correcting something I wrote, substantiated in some way
I am happy to look at whatever documentation you have links to and discern whether it seems authentic enough to include. I have looked extensively through both the ReGAIN site and the Legion’s site for information, as well as pulled from various public news reports and articles, all referenced near the end.
May Christ bless you!
Timeline
1920: Fr. Maciel is born in Mexico
1941: Foundation of the Apostolic School of the Missionaries of the Sacred Heart of Jesus and of Our Lady of Sorrows in Mexico City, considered the foundation date of the Legion of Christ
1944: Fr. Maciel is ordained to the priesthood
1948: The Holy See grants the Legion canonical approval with the Nihil Obstat and subsequently Bishop Alfonso Espino y Silva grants canonical establishment to the Legion (still under the name Missionaries of the Sacred Heart and of Our Lady of Sorrows)
Just after the Bishop canonically established the Legion, an urgent letter was received from the Vatican asking us not to proceed with the establishment of the congregation. Fr. Maciel describes that the reason for the annulment was a series of very serious accusations against me which branded me as a liar and a drunkard and a thief, and declared that I was practically holding the seminarians prisoner, not letting them go to confession with anyone except me.
However, the bishop gathered testimonies and proved to the Holy See the falsehood of the accusations, exposing the lies with documented proofs and testimonies from the individuals alluded to in the accusations, from the Cistercian confessor, Father Luis Yague of the abbey of Cobreces, who heard the confessions of my seminarians weekly, and from others.
When I spoke to Cardinal Lavitrano [the Prefect of the Congregation for Religious, whose office had issued the order to annul the establishment of the Legion] for the first time, he was quite surprised because he knew nothing about the congregation being dissolved and found out that the dissolution was invalid since he, the Prefect, had been in the dark about it and had not signed the decree….reassuring me that the congregation did exist juridically within the Church.
The end result: The charges were proved false and the Legion was canonically established as a religious congregation of diocesan right within the Church.
1949: Fr. Maciel allegedly made sexual advances toward Fernando Perez Olvera, 14 years old, who says he resisted the advances, tried to get away, and was subsequently expelled from the Legion.
1950: Fr. Maciel allegedly sexually abused Juan Vaca, 12 years old, who says the abuse occurred in a seminary in Spain.
Early 1950s: Fr. Maciel allegedly abused Alejandro Espinosa Alcala.
Fr. Maciel allegedly abused Juan Manuel Fernandez.
Fr. Maciel allegedly tried to abuse Saul Barrales Arellano but he resisted.
1954: August 24th: The alleged date that a letter was written by Frederico Dominguez to Archbishop Lomeli of Mexico City (PDF file linked to from the ReGAIN webpage referenced below).
My summary of the charges Mr. Dominguez made against Fr. Maciel at this time:
- Fr. Maciel does not pray his breviary and reads shallow magazines
- Fr. Maciel does not do the morning meditation he is supposed to do
- Fr. Maciel does not pay extended visits to the Blessed Sacrament
- Fr. Maciel does not keep a regular daily routine of waking, praying, etc.
- Fr. Maciel divulges secrets to people who do not need to know them
- Fr. Maciel used tricks and shady maneuvers to answer the 1948 accusations
- Fr. Maciel exaggerated stories about himself to make himself look good
- Fr. Maciel told him he suffered an illness, presumed to be of sexual glands
- Fr. Maciel breaks the rule of poverty by staying in expensive hotels
- Fr. Maciel called the congregation the Legion of Christ without permission
- Fr. Maciel misses daily Mass by making excuses about his health
- Fr. Maciel made serious detracting attacks on the Jesuits
- Fr. Maciel makes grand-sounding plans to impress others and get their money
- Fr. Maciel celebrated Mass in a town without getting the bishop’s approval
- Fr. Maciel injects himself every five hours with expensive stupefying drugs, whereupon he makes grandiose apostolic plans and reveals the defects of others
- Fr. Maciel made friends inside the Vatican to find out what obstacles there were to the establishment of the Legion and by cunning means got it approved
Mr. Dominguez then says the Fr. Maciel has steadily gotten more and more ill, leading to greater and greater spiritual decadence. In 2005, Mr .Dominguez reiterated that this letter he wrote above was accurate and stated that he also wrote the letter from Fr. Luis Ferreira (described under year 1956 events below) with Fr. Ferreira’s input.
1955: Fr. Maciel allegedly abused Arturo Jurado Guzman, 16 years old, who says he eventually fought Fr. Maciel’s advances.
Fr. Maciel allegedly abused Jose Antonio Olvera, the brother of Fernando Olvera (mentioned in year 1949 events).
Fr. Maciel allegedly abused Jose Barba, 15 years old, who says the abuse happened in Rome.
1956:
August 23: The alleged date on which Federico Dominguez on Luis Ferreira’s behalf wrote a letter to Archbishop Lomeli of Mexico City. This letter is in PDF form linked to from the ReGAIN link referenced below. It seems that this letter, though seemingly written by Fr. Luis Ferreira, was written by Federico Dominguez with Fr. Ferreira’s input (see year 1954 events). I could be wrong about this and perhaps Mr. Dominguez is referring to a different letter that he wrote with Fr. Ferreira’s input?
This letter makes two main accusations against Fr. Maciel:
- Firsthand account: He was a drug addict who constantly had Legionaries procure his drugs, and
- Secondhand account: Ferreira heard from others that Fr. Maciel had sexually abused more than one Legionary.
Fr. Ferreira describes Fr. Maciel’s alleged drug addiction in great detail, and he makes it clear that a large number of people inside and outside the Legion knew about this rampant addiction.
October/November 1956: Exile and Beginning of Canonical Visitations
Fr. Maciel is exiled from Rome and forbidden to have any contact with the Legion by order of the Vatican. Charges of drug addiction were brought to the Vatican. It is unclear whether the other charges listed above made by Mr. Dominguez were also received by the Vatican.
The evidence shows that no charges of sexual abuse had been made against him to the Vatican, though the alleged sexual abuse had already occurred. Explanations for this incongruity are given by some of Fr. Maciel’s accusers 50 years later, and we will look at their response in the analysis section after this timeline.
Fr. Maciel states: No official written document ever reached me informing me of what was happening or giving me instructions. I received instructions directly by word of mouth and through third parties, and I was denied any possibility of defense. I was simply informed that I still held the office of general superior but was deprived of the faculty to govern, though I should keep working to sustain the congregation financially.
Cardinal Tedeschini asked Fr. Maciel during this time: Why do you keep on building that novitiate if you might end up expelled from the congregation, or if the congregation might be dissolved? To which Fr. Maciel said: But I figured that if our situation failed to right itself, at least the building would be there for the Church to use. That’s why I kept going with the project.
November 1956 - February 1959: Canonical Visitations
With Fr. Maciel exiled and forbidden to have any contact with the Legion, for the next 2.25 years the Vatican sent investigator priests to the Legion to determine whether the charges against Fr. Maciel were true; these priests interviewed every Legionary brother in formation and priest and spent extensive amounts of time with the Legion in their formation centers in Italy and in Mexico, eventually compiling reports that they took back to the Vatican and which were reviewed before a decision was made as to Fr. Maciel’s guilt or innocence.
Almost all of the accusers were present and were interviewed by the investigators during this time period, which included multiple visits and interviews, and had the opportunity to make their accusations of sexual abuse, but not one of them did so.
Fr. Polidoro, one of the investigators said this: In the process of investigating the charges against Father Maciel, the Apostolic Visitators questioned every member of the Legion. That questioning was direct and probing. Our interest was either to prove or disprove the charges against Fr. Maciel conclusively, once and for all. At no point in our extensive and searching interviews about the character and deeds of Father Maciel did a single allegation of sexual impropriety ever surface.
Who were all the investigators?
Director of the investigation (did not actually visit himself):
Monsignor Arcadio Larraona, CMF (the Claretian religious congregation)
Monsignor Larraona chose the following investigators:
Fr. Anastasio del Santissimo Rosario, Superior General of the Carmelite order, Italian
Fr. Benjamin Lachaert, the Carmelite Superior General’s secretary, Belgian
Fr. Polidoro Van Vlieberghe, a Belgian Flemish Franciscan
And Monsignor Larraona chose as the interim director of the Legion’s mother house in Rome:
Monsignor Alfredo Bontempi, Italian
I compiled the above list of priests drawing from an article on the ReGAIN site (written by Jose Barba) and the Legion.
The Investigation
At the beginning of the investigation, Fr. Maciel was examined by three doctors for his alleged rampant drug addiction, which supposedly was so bad that up to 40 injections of the drug were given to him in one day (cf. Luis Ferreira’s letter).
The drug test results from all three doctors showed Fr. Maciel did not have any drugs in his system.
It seems that most of the documents the investigators created are not public record and are probably held in the Vatican. What we do have are the letters from the investigator Fr. Polidoro, who ReGAIN says investigated the Legion’s Mexican houses of formation.
Fr. Polidoro said of the original accusers, Mr. Dominguez and Mr. Ferreira: the accusations were disingenuous and always seemed calculated to create the greatest impact with the particular audience to whom they were presented.
In 1996, (now Bishop) Polidoro said that these charges were part of a methodically organized campaign to discredit Father Maciel and the Legionaries of Christ and that all of the charges raised against Father Maciel at that time were meritless. (from the Hartford Courant article)
The charges having been found to be completely false, coupled with the clean drug tests, exonerated Fr. Maciel and in February of 1959, the Vatican fully restored him to his functions as superior general of the Legion.
1965: The Holy See grants the Decree of Praise, Decretum Laudis, to the Congregation of the Legionaries of Christ, changing the status of the Legion from being an institution of diocesan right to pontifical right.
1978: Juan Vaca, one of the accusers, sent a letter with his accusations to the Vatican. Felix Alarcon, another accuser, sent a supporting letter along with it.
1983: Pope John Paul II approves the Legion’s Constitutions.
1989: Juan Vaca sent a letter to the Vatican requesting release from his priestly vows and reiterating his accusations against Fr. Maciel; 4 years later in 1993 the Vatican released him from his priestly vows. Mr. Vaca had by that time already gotten married civilly but then had a wedding in the Church.
1998: The 8 accusers send their charges to the Vatican against Fr. Maciel.
2002: Fr. Maciel publishes an official denial of all the charges.
2004: The Congregation for the Institutes of Consecrated Life and Societies of Apostolic Life grants final approval to the Regnum Christi Movement Statutes.
2005: January: The Vatican opens (or re-opens) the case made by the 8 accusers’ charges.
2006: May: The Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith decided: taking account of the advanced age of the Reverend Maciel and his delicate health - to renounce any canonical process and to invite the Father to a reserved life of prayer and penance, renouncing every public ministry. The Holy Father has approved these decisions. Independently of the person of the Founder, the worthy apostolate of the Legionaries of Christ and the Regnum Christi Association is recognized with gratitude.
Analysis
1948 accusations:
This accuser might have been Fr. Lucio Rodrigo, SJ, but the only source I found for that is from ReGAIN. Fr. Lucio was the congregation’s spiritual advisor at this time and the public letters written by him were full of praise and admiration for the Legion, so if he was the accuser, it would indicate a very strange dichotomy of attitude toward the Legion.
In any case, the accusations were found to be false and the Vatican gave canonical approval to the Legion.
1956 - 1959 Suspension of Fr. Maciel and Investigation
From the Hartford Courant article in 1997: In interviews, the former Legionaries [the accusers] said they assumed that the 1956 accusations involved sexual molestation. They said they are surprised now to hear differently from the only one of the four Vatican investigators [Polidoro] said to be still alive.
But the men who claimed in the 90s that Fr. Maciel abused them in the 50s prior to the investigation had the opportunity to tell the investigators that they were being abused; Fr. Maciel was suspended and removed for over 2 years, so why didn’t they?
The answers given by the accusers as to why they were silent was that they were afraid or were being obedient.
Drug Addiction
The fact that Fr. Maciel was clean of drugs can only be explained in a few ways:
- The accusations were lies: He truly was clean of drugs because he had not ever done them
- The accusations were true: He had done drugs but stopped just before the drug tests in October, 1956, and the short time in between was enough for the drugs to leave his system without a detectable trace
How rapidly a person’s body could rid itself of the particular drugs he is accused of abusing (which are morphine-like)? Online sources I examined said that morphine can be detected in a person’s system varying from hours to days to months to years, depending on the person, the length of time the drug was used and how much was used, and how the test administered (blood, urine, hair, and so on).
Ferreira accuses Fr. Maciel of abusing these drugs heavily for 7 years (1949 - 1956) leading right up to the drug tests, so it seems most probable that the drugs would be detected by the doctors’ tests, if there were any in his body.
Another incongruity with the accusations of drug addiction were the detailed descriptions that alleged Fr. Maciel was so addicted to these drugs that they were consuming his life, leading him to do outlandish and crazed things to get the drugs, involving many persons in the Legion and outside of it.
If the accusations were true, it seems to me that his drug addiction would have been very widely known, would have led to his debilitation (Ferreira claims Fr. Maciel was admitted to a sanatorium for some time even) and inability to function as the founder and superior general of a visible and growing congregation.
Instead, history shows that Fr. Maciel was capably leading the Legion and that as a result it was growing and thriving.
The Investigator’s Conclusion: Fr. Maciel Is Innocent
ReGAIN says that the letters of investigator Polidoro are fabrications of the Legion, but if the investigators’ verdict was other than what is publicly reported, that is, if the accusations were found true by them, Fr. Maciel would have been expelled, discredited, and never allowed to return to the head of the Legion, so it can be definitely determined that the accusations were judged to be false by the investigators.
1990s and 2000s:
There were originally 9 accusers, but one of them, Miguel Diaz Rivera, who had first sworn an affidavit accusing Fr. Maciel of sexual abuse, then shortly thereafter retracted his charges in another sworn affidavit, stating that he was approached by the other accusers and asked to lie in order to defame Fr. Maciel.
Three other men, all former Legionaries, say that they were propositioned by the accusers to conspire to lie also: Armando Arias Sanchez, Valente Velazquez, and Jorge Luis Gonzalez Limon, who all said that the accusers pressured them to collaborate in the false accusations in order to discredit Fr. Maciel.
Most interesting is Mr. Rivera, who first joined the accusers and then retracted his accusations and said the other men put him up to it. Why would he do such a thing?
The most probable answer to me is that he, like the other accusers, had intentionally or unintentionally been hurt by members of the Legion in some way, perhaps even by Fr. Maciel himself, and so there was a motivation to get back at him and the Legion.
He took this opportunity when the other accusers approached him and made false accusations with them. Then, however, his conscience convicted him of the deceit of trying to ruin someone’s good name with false charges, so he retracted his charges and admitted the truth, that the others had asked him to lie along with them.
But why then did the Vatican invite Fr. Maciel to spend the rest of his life in prayer and penance, renouncing public ministry?
What, in fact, is the exact meaning, canonically speaking, of their directive?
I am not a canon lawyer, but Ed Peters is, and he is the only canon lawyer who I have found who has offered any public analysis of the directive. His first and main analysis is here: http://www.canonlaw.info/2006/05/fr-maciels-penance_19.html.
Important quotes: Several obstacles stand in the way of a formal canonical trial in Maciel’s case. First, such accusations, by their very nature, are difficult to prove (that being one of the most enraging aspects of this scandal); second, the long period of time since the alleged acts raises serious questions (usually under the rubric of statutes of limitations) about the prudence of attempting to adjudicate such cases at all; third, the juridic problems associated with the excessively long list of “affirmative defenses” that defendants can use to resist canonical penalties (chiefly in 1983 CIC 1323-1324) are very difficult to address during a trial; finally, in every prosecution of the elderly (Maciel is 86), prosecutors ask cui bono?
And also: Nothing here proves the accusations against Maciel, which he has repeatedly denied; nor does it force the conclusion that CDF believes the accusations; in fact, we do not even know whether CDF is using the word “penance” with a sanctions-connotation. As American lawyers would say, there is wiggle-room in the statement, and it is possible that today we see Maciel joining the sad list of holy men and women who, over the centuries, have been vilified by the world and mistreated by ecclesiastical authority.
On the other hand, Rome is not in the habit of publicly telling successful, high-profile Church leaders to go off and spend their lives in private penance. It is possible that CDF examined the Maciel case, found within it evidence of grave misconduct yet, like the farmer who discovered weeds growing amid the wheat (Matt XIII), decided that uprooting the evil now would harm the innocent…
His follow-up analysis is here: http://www.canonlaw.info/2008/02/caveat-lector-fr-maciel-was-not_3168.html.
In the follow-up, entitled Caveat lector: Fr. Maciel was not “suspended”, Mr. Peters says: Precisely in light of that analysis, I would caution against describing Maciel having been “suspended” or “penalized” by the Holy See. Under canon law, and in contrast with civil usage, suspension is a penalty imposed on those found guilty of certain crimes (1983 CIC 221, 1319, 1333, 1400-1401). Make of CDF’s directive what one will, but Maciel was not tried and was not found guilty of any crimes; it is, therefore, not accurate to describe him as “suspended” or “penalized”.
In the very sad United States priestly abuse scandal, many priests were accused of abuse going decades back, even 50+ years back. Some of these priests were innocent, yet they had their good names dragged through the mud and tarnished forever because of unscrupulous persons who had a vendetta against the Church or someone within the Church.
It only takes one person to make an accusation against you to ruin your reputation. Most people, including myself, believe an accusation at face value because most of us are very honest and so naturally wonder why would someone make such a horrible charge unless it were true? It’s hard to imagine one person hating another so much that they would make up a lie in order to ruin them, yet sadly, this does happen, and the best way we as humans have to find out the truth is a trial.
But Fr. Maciel was never given a trial, so human justice was not done. If he was guilty, he got off lightly with this CDF directive. If he was innocent, he was unfairly defamed by liars and a shadow is cast over him, even in death, as many presume his guilt.
One thing is certain now, however: Fr. Maciel has met Jesus Christ face-to-face and received divine justice, which never errs and cannot be deceived.
Pope Benedict and Fr. Alvaro Corcuera, LC
– Devin Rose
Here follows the section of links to references that I pulled from.
1941 - 1949 references:
- Timeline of the Legion (but no accusations are mentioned): http://www.legionariesofchrist.org/eng/articulos/categoria_secc.phtml?lc=id-18316_se-238_ca-886_te-475_ci-887
- 1948 Fr. Maciel quotes: Christ Is My Life, the interview with Fr. Maciel compiled into a book (#33 - #35)
- The Legion of Christ, a History: http://www.legionaryhistory.com/index.php?nav=chapt10
- Fr. Lucio Rodrigo, SJ mentioned in one of the letters on the ReGAIN site: http://www.regainnetwork.org/let/let.html
1950 - 1959 references:
- Letters (in PDF format) by Frederico Dominguez and Luis Ferreira: http://www.regainnetwork.org/let/let.html
- I calculated the alleged abuse dates using the Courant news story ages of the accusers and the date that the news story was written: http://www.courant.com/news/local/hc-maciel-archive2_23_97,0,5978860.story?page=1
- 1956 Fr. Maciel quotes: Christ Is My Life, #40, 41
- 1956 - 1959: On ReGAIN, accuser Jose Barba’s account of the investigation: http://www.regainnetwork.org/article.php?a=47245868
- Drug testing references:
- http://www.homedrugtestingkit.com/drug_info.html#howlong
- http://www.blurtit.com/q374931.html
- http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20060708152534AAjYVC8
- I originally read them on the Legionary site here http://www.legionariosdecristo.org/courant.htm but now that link does not work and I haven’t been able to find a new site with the document
- I did find part of his quotes here: http://unitypublishing.com/NewReligiousMovements/LOCFOR.html
- 1996 ones from the Hartford Courant’s article: http://www.courant.com/news/local/hc-maciel-archive2_23_97,0,5978860.story?page=6
1990s and 2000s:
- When the accusations were made: http://ncronline.org/NCR_Online/archives2/2005a/010705/010705i.php
- The communiqué from the Vatican concerning Fr. Maciel: http://nationalcatholicreporter.org/update/maciel_communique.pdf
- The names of the 3 other former Legionaries who were asked to conspire to make false accusations against Fr. Maciel: http://chiesa.espresso.repubblica.it/articolo/31208?eng=y
The names of the 9 Accusers (8 living):
Arturo Jurado
Juan Vaca
Felix Alarcon
Jose Barba
Fernando Perez Olvera
Jose Antonio Olvera
Alejandro Espinosa Alcala
Saul Barrales Arellano
Juan Manuel Fernandez (deathbed accusation after stroke)
10th accuser who recanted and said he was asked by the others to lie:
Miguel Diaz Rivera
Three other former Legionaries who say that they were propositioned by the accusers to conspire to lie:
Armando Arias Sanchez, Valente Velazquez, and Jorge Luis Gonzalez Limon
February 6th, 2008 at 11:25 am
This is a laudable and cool-headed effort, Devin.
February 8th, 2008 at 2:09 am
wow, Devin..thanks for putting this together..that is an amazing piece of work and extremely informative! I know very little of Fr. Maciel but when I first heard of the accusations the only thing that came to mind was, “the tree shall be known by its fruit” May God continue to bless the Legion and all of those in the Regnum Christi movement..and may the good God have mercy on his soul.
February 11th, 2008 at 2:05 pm
Fr. Luis Ferreira was a priest and continued to be one after leaving the Legion until his death.
February 11th, 2008 at 2:19 pm
Fairness would require a listing of those accusers who have come forward AFTER the original ten.
February 11th, 2008 at 4:20 pm
Thank you Raquel and Veronica.
Glenn: About Fr. Ferreira, are you commenting to request that I add “Fr.” before his name? If so, I will be happy to.
About the accusers: I did not find names of other accusers who made charges against Fr. Maciel after the original ones. Please comment and send me a reference that lists their names, when they made charges, and what their charges were, and I will look at it. I did not intend to be unfair, but rather only want to list that which I found that seemed publicly verifiable (i.e. both ReGAIN and the Legion say Fr. Maciel was suspended from 1956 - 1959 and that an investigation occurred, both groups acknowledge that these 10 men made formal charges, etc.)
February 14th, 2008 at 9:28 pm
Glenn, I have changed references from Mr. Ferreira to Fr. Ferreira. I am awaiting the documentation or references I can look at for the other accusers you said existed.
February 17th, 2008 at 1:52 pm
http://www.regainnetwork.org/article.php?a=47245989
http://www.regainnetwork.org/article.php?a=47245988
http://www.regainnetwork.org/article.php?a=47245972
February 17th, 2008 at 1:56 pm
http://www.regainnetwork.org/article.php?a=47245984
February 17th, 2008 at 1:58 pm
http://www.renewamerica.us/columns/mershon/060807
http://www.rickross.com/reference/loc/loc51.html
http://www.jornada.unam.mx/2005/04/29/051n1soc.php
February 28th, 2008 at 2:22 pm
I think it should be clarified that the three who said they were approached to lie were not recanters ie they did not at one point say they were abused and then say they were lying.
They were also working for the Legion or for relatives of Maciel, at the time of saying they were thus approached.
So there were 10 accusers, one of whom recanted.