Abuse of Authority - shocking revelations of Focolare practices

In a one-hour year-end collegamento of news of the Focolare Movement (which can be seen on Vimeo)  - overwhelmingly good, of course - President Maria Voce, shortly to end her term, and co-president Jesus Moran touch on the not-so-good news of sexual abuse in the movement.  Moran also refers - as though it were something unusual and rare in the movement - to ‘abuse of authority’.  Anyone who knows anything about Focolare, is aware that the very system of the movement is based on a confusion between pastoral and administrative practice which results in an abuse of authority.  This was confirmed when the Vatican recently banned the practice of daily written examinations of conscience - known as the schemetti - by full-time members, single and married, which had to be handed to local authorities and ended up as permanently held records at the centre of the movement.

A recent article in cruxnow.com, entitled Reform or Suppression: Troubled lay movements need outside oversight by Junno Arocho Esteves, highlights this problem:

‘Jesuit Father Hans Zollner, a professor of psychology and president of the Centre for Child Protection at the Pontifical Gregorian University in Rome, told Catholic News Service Nov. 4 that before deciding to dissolve a movement or community, certain criteria should be met to indicate reform is possible.

“One condition would be how much that community or that movement is really willing to revise its statutes and its way of proceeding under the guidance of someone external,” such as a commissioner, Zollner told CNS.

A key issue, he said, is a willingness to have a clear separation of “spiritual guidance and external power” when it comes to decision-making.

“A spiritual director should never have the power to direct the movement or a decision for a person,” he said. “There needs to be a separation between who decides the mission aspect (‘forum externum’) and who knows about the spiritual side (‘forum internum’). This is a very important point which some of those movements and some of those religious congregations have not been taking seriously, against the tradition and the law of the church.” ’

Given these statements, the following extract from a yet-unpublished book of mine, The World and the Flesh* is a shocking example of how the Focolare Movement metes out its supreme authority in a manner which shatters all concepts of human rights and breaks the Canon Law of the Catholic Church on ‘enforced manifestation of conscience’, as described by Father Zollner above:

If the Catholic hierarchy is increasingly vulnerable to prosecution for its sexual politics, this is even more the case for its allies in the Church, the various groups and movements.  Besides being less protected by concordats, these organisations are going one step further than the hierarchy in that they are rigidly applying the Vatican's sexual ideology on a practical level within their own structures.  

In May 2000, US Immigration granted asylum to Carlos Ramirez [name changed].  Ramirez is gay and one of the principle grounds for the decision was that he had suffered persecution for his sexual orientation while training to be a full-time member of the Focolare Movement at its centre of Loppiano, near Florence, Italy.  Having joined Focolare in his own Latin American country at the age of fifteen, Ramirez had dedicated himself unstintingly to the service of the movement.  When it came to choosing a university course, for instance, the decision was made at Focolare's Rome headquarters, according to what would best serve the movement's needs.  Having completed his degree course, he was sent to its training centre at Loppiano, Italy.  

When Ramirez confessed to his superior that he was homosexual, a fact that he had known from his childhood,  'That day, my life changed forever and nothing will be the same again,' Ramirez recalls.  'I was convinced that the Church will understand and the fact of being gay was not the main aspect of my life.  But I was wrong… Even after all those years working with them, I was treated as a criminal, as "a natural sinner, an aberration of God's love".'  

He was immediately dispatched to Rome where he was interrogated by a panel of five senior Focolare members who bombarded him with such questions as 'Did you touch the other members?  Did you touch yourself?  When you played with the kids did you…?  Do you have fantasies?  What kind?  Do any of them involve Jesus?' [From the affidavit of 'Carlos Ramirez' submitted as part of the asylum application – dossier in the possession of the author.] 

Following this consultation Ramirez was sent back to Loppiano where he was kept under strict surveillance by his superiors, who monitored who he talked with, his friends, his study group. He was told to go to bed after everyone else in his single-sex community 'to avoid temptation' and to rise earlier than the others so that he could shower alone.  While in bed, he was to sleep with his arms outside the covers – even in winter - so that he would not be tempted to 'touch himself'.  Ramirez was encouraged to take more exercise in order to help ward off temptation – but in long pants, not in shorts.  He was forced to do an hour of penance each day, praying for his 'conversion'.  Although Ramirez had previously worked with children visiting Loppiano he was now dismissed from this task and sent to the kitchens.  Though he was originally scheduled to spend his summer holidays with a group of other young men by the sea, at the last minute his superior told him he was to go 'to the mountains' alone instead because 'at the beach, people would be wearing swimming costumes and I would be exposed to the devil'.  

Ramirez was summoned to a final consultation in Rome where the panel which had interrogated him delivered its findings: he was indeed homosexual and therefore not fit to become a fulltime member of the movement.  He was to be sent home  within two or three days.  Through a phonecall to friends in his own country, Ramirez learned that his family and Focolare colleagues had already been informed of the reasons for his return.  He discovered that he was to be excluded from the activities of the movement and knew that he would face rejection from his family on account of his homosexuality.  Anxious that Ramirez' hasty departure should not be too much of a 'trauma' for his classmates – his feelings were not considered – his superiors at Loppiano concocted an elaborate lie that he was returning home because his mother was seriously ill.  This subterfuge was compounded by a little sermon on the duty of a Christian towards his parents.  Ramirez was compelled to go along with the deception even when, seeing the young man's distress, his unsuspecting classmates promised their prayers for his mother's recovery and reassured him that she would soon be well and he would be able to return to complete his course.  

At the airport, he was presented with a one-way ticket and a $100 in cash.  When he realised that the plane touched down in the US, Ramirez determined to alight there and seek refuge with friends.  Three years later, having rebuilt his life from scratch in the US, Ramirez was granted asylum on the basis of his treatment by Focolare.  His case is not an isolated one.  In Western society, in which human rights are ever more protected by legislation, the Vatican's sexual ideology as promulgated and practised by its allies is sure to throw up thousands of similar cases.   

According to Jesus Moran, abuse of authority is totally against Chiara Lubich’s original wishes.  I’d like to see the proof! 

*This book was to all intents and purposes banned by my German publishers (who nevertheless paid my substantial advance in full), because they were taken over by a company in which the Catholic Church was a majority shareholder and were therefore too nervous to go ahead with it.  As it deals with the sexual politics of the Vatican under ‘Saint’ John Paul II and Benedict XVI, I felt that in the era of Pope Frances it is now irrelevant.  Given the new criticisms arising around that period with the MacCarrick report and Frederic Martel’s In the Closet of the Vatican I am not so sure.  I think that the abuses caused and tolerated by the Vatican in that period need to be thoroughly investigated and uncovered.

The Divine Dictionary - A is for Attic

 In 1906, the American writer and satirist Ambrose Bierce published The Devil's Dictionary, giving parallel, but strikingly accurate (and cynical) definitions of common words.  For example: 'Education, n. That which discloses to the wise and disguises from the foolish their lack of understanding.'  Or: 'Christian, n. One who believes that the New Testament is a divinely inspired book admirably suited to the spiritual needs of his neighbour.'  Inspired by this example, I am launching a new series on this blog entitled The Divine Dictionary which will supply the world with the much-needed guide to how the Focolare Movement has redefined many common words.  As far as I am aware, most of these words are part of the unwritten 'internal' culture of Focolare, so for those who wish to know the nature of the Movement from within may find this new Divine Dictionary useful.  There are numerous examples, so please send me suggestions or queries.  We are starting with...

A is for Attic

'Attic' is one of the first words to be redefined for you when you encounter the Focolare Movement, because it comes at the very start of 'The Story of the Ideal', the simple, enchanting and rigidly fossilised account of how the movement began.

The definition is clear:  the attic is where you put your books.  All of them.

As I explained in The Pope's Armada, 'An extreme integrism underlies Focolare's anti-intellectualism - indeed, its opposition to thought of any kind in its members.  This atiitutude dates from the very beginnings of the movement.

'Chiara Lubcih described how God told her to give up her philosophy studies: "It was when, in order that He could become our Teacher and instruct us in the truth, God asked to sacrifice all the truth that men could give us. It was when, so as to reveal Himself to us, God gave us the strength to put all the books of other teachers in the attic."

'The symbolic act of "putting one's books in the attic" came to signify, in the lore of the movement, the rejection of human learning.  It remains one of its most powerful slogans.  Chiara Lubich emphasises that this radical rejection of outside knowledge is a fundamental step to be taken by all recruits:  "This act of our life is the basis of all the doctrine of the 'Ideal'. It has to be the basis for anyone who wishes to follow Jesus in His Work [the movement]." 

'...Chiara states categorically that "One thing was certain: He who lived among us was God and therefore he was able to reply to all the questions that all men of all time might pose." And the condition for this 'illumination' is also made quite clear: "... the complete void of our minds".'  

I should hastily add, that this means everyone else's minds - the only exception being hers.  In practice, putting one's books in the attic means that she becomes the sole teacher and authority for all the members of the movement.

Clearly she disagreed with that other noted thinker, Socrates, who said, 'Employ your time in improving yourself by other men's writings so that you shall come easily by what others have laboured hard for.'  She thought differently from Socrates on another subject.  He believed that 'The only true wisdom is knowing you know nothing.'  Whereas she apparently believed she knew everything and revealed her teachings, ironically, in numerous books.   She certainly disagreed with Socrates' dictum, 'I cannot teach anybody anything.  I can only make them think.'

 'Put your books in the attic' is Focolare's low key equivalent of Nazi book burnings. It is therefore not surprising that this phrase is like a red rag to a bull to those outside the movment.  In the process of publishing The Pope's Armada, the book was closely read by Bantam Press'  top firm of solicitors in the City of London.  They had drawn up a list of possibly contentious items - on all of which I was able to satisfy them  By a strange coincidence, the lawyer handling the matter was a practising Anglican and had attended one of Focolare's Easter Anglican trips to Rome, including a visit to Loppiano.  In reading The Pope's Armada, what really outraged him and alerted him to Focolare's true intentions was the phrase 'Put your books in the attic'.

A French couple who had suffered great distress as a result of their daughter 'Marie' becoiming a Focolarina, when she paid one of her 2-day annual visits to their home, mentioned to her the fact that they had read the French edition of my book (Golias, 1999).  A few days later they received a letter from her, giving the approved Focolare view on the book.  'Marie' concluded the letter, rather unwisely: 'Leave this book in the attic'.  As I recounted in the revised version of The Pope's Armada,  'Not surprisingly, aware that this was a Focolare catch-phrase, Marie's mother felt this was the last straw and denounced "your anti-intellectual doctrine which rejects human teaching...It is certainly not thanks to Chiara Lubich that researchers struggle to relieve the scourges of mankind such as cancer, AIDS etc...Any psychologist could tell you that you are in a fool's paradise. " '

In the years I spent as a member of the Movement, I recall specific examples when 'books' were dismissed out of hand.  While I was doing a degree in English and Italian Literature, I mentioned to Jean-Marie Wallet, the head of the London Focolare, that, since meeting the movement, I was having increasing difficulty reading the books on my syllabus.  'Yes,' he nodded sagely: 'once you have read the writings of Chiara Lubich, the great works of world literature fade into insignificance.'  On another occasion I rememebr Fede, the head of the men's branch of the movement, commenting that, 'Shakespeare was a great expert on the "old man".'  This term was appropriated by the movement from St Paul, to signify everything that is evil in human nature and in each individual - qualities also known in the Movement as the 'human'.  Clearly Fede had not read Portia's soaring speech on mercy in The Merchant of Venice or, from the same play, Shylock's speech on racial discrimination, at least four centuries ahead of its time.

When history recalls the enemies of books like Hitler, Mao, Stalin, Cardinal Ratzinger (who ordered the pulping of Lavinia Byrne's Women at the Altar, on the subject of women priests, in  the late 1990's  ), and Bishop  Diego de Landa who burnt the Mayan codices  - there's no need to leave out the distaff side.  They had their bonfires, Chiara Lubich had her attic.

The Pope and I - Prologue

Given that I am the author of a book which was considered anti-Pope (which it wasn’t), it is very surprising for me to witness recent actions of Pope Francis, and to read papal documents and speeches which show that we are in very close harmony. Some of his very strongly worded thoughts are virtually identical to those I expressed in The Pope’s Armada twenty five years ago. So I am starting an occasional series of posts on this site which I will call - perhaps cheekily, but with serious intentions - The Pope and I! As a Prologue (like Das Rheingold to Wagner’s Ring), here is an article I wrote in March 2013, just before Francis was elected. Looking at it now, I feel that in Francis we got exactly what we needed - exactly what I described then. After the horrible drought of ‘Saint’ John Paul II and Benedict XVI, finally RAIN! 

 

March 2013

It has been a papal election like no other. The Catholic Church is torn by a very public crisis. The world-wide paedophile scandal has led to mass walk-outs of members in the Catholic heartlands – including Ireland and the United States. The Vatileaks debacle has highlighted corruption and division at the very heart of the Church, within the Curia, and its central government. All this against a background of division between the faithful about what the basic message and ethos of the Catholic Church should be in the 21st century – the role of women, for example, and an understanding of the nature of man and sexuality in the light of modern science. The urgency of dealing with this crisis has been highlighted by Pope Benedict’s shock resignation – a frank admission that at his advanced age he is simply not up to dealing with a problem on this scale and at the same time an urgent reminder that it must be dealt with. 

 In their pre-conclave deliberations, the job description for the next pope emerged from interviews the cardinals gave before voting began: he must be a man of God yet with the necessary strength and skill to reform the Curia; he must have no interest in cultivating a personal image yet possess a genuine warmth and spontaneity, enabling him to reach out not only to the most alienated among his own flock but also those of other faiths and none; he must be a communicator at the highest level, yet a man of the people; he must possess a vision of the Church’s long-term needs yet bring immediate healing to the divisions, hurt and bitterness felt by many in the Church. He must be a man whose heart and mind can encompass the whole of humanity and not just Catholics. 

 An impossible dream? Possibly, but this job description for our times is a perfect fit for arguably the greatest pope of the last century – perhaps of the last few centuries – Pope John XXIII. Elected as a caretaker pope in 1958 at the age of 76, he turned out to be the Church’s greatest reformer in 500 years with his shock announcement of the Second Vatican Council, an event which would bring the all Church’s bishops together to hammer out a blueprint for ‘The Church in the Modern World’ – the title of one the Council’s seminal documents. What was extraordinary about John – and set the tone for his Council – was that he focused only on the good in people and society. He spoke of the ‘signs of the times’ – his sense of God at work in contemporary society, with its desire for peace and reconciliation in the post-war years. 

In his speech at the opening ceremony of the Council he set himself against 'the prophets of doom' among his own collaborators (he was referring to the traditionalist cardinals of the Curia) for whom 'the modern world is nothing but betrayal and ruination', contrasting this view with his conviction that 'Providence is guiding us towards a new order of human relationships which, thanks to human effort and yet far surpassing its hopes, will bring us to the realisation of still higher and undreamed of expectations.' The Pontiff went on to emphasise that the goal of this Council - unlike most previous Councils, and in particular, his Council's immediate forerunner, Vatican I - would be a positive one of encouragement rather than condemnation: ‘to make use of the medicine of mercy rather than that of severity. [The Church]...meets the needs of the present day by demonstrating the validity of her teaching rather than by condemnations.’ 

How ironic, therefore, that Pope Benedict, in a speech late last year proclaiming a Year of Faith to mark the 50th anniversary of the Council, should condemn today’s world in the most bitter terms: ‘Recent decades have seen the advance of a spiritual “desertification”. In the Council’s time it was already possible from a few tragic pages of history to know what a life or a world without God looked like, but now we see it every day around us. This void has spread…This, then, is how we can picture the Year of Faith: a pilgrimage in the deserts of today’s world.’ Benedict’s speech typifies the image of the pope, already well-established by John Paul II, as a finger-wagging, anachronistic figurehead, whose authority has been rendered hollow by the revelations of wrong-doing among the Catholic clergy.

If his successor is to fulfil his mission as bridge-builder (Pontiff) and the servant of the servants of God, then, like Pope John XXIII, he must be able to listen, to discern the positive and hopeful ‘signs of the times’, to encourage the good in individuals and society. He must be able to answer this question (a line from the Pulitzer-prize winning musical South Pacific) to Catholics and non-Catholics alike: ‘I know what you are against – what are you for?’