Even Superior Generals Leave the Institute

We've already touched on how the deep rooted problems at the Institute of the Incarnate Word lead so many to leave the group - even after ordination and perpetual vows.  (Our estimate was that at least 40% and possibly over 50% of priests ordained within the IVE have left the group.)  What we didn't know then and what has recently come to light is that even IVE Superior Generals have taken part it in the exodus.

Fr. Solari: Elected Then Ejected

In 1994 Argentine church authorities forced IVE founder Fr. Carlos Buela to resign and exiled him to Ecuador.  In his place the IVE unanimously elected Fr José Luis Solari as superior general.  Later, when Cardinal Sodano helped move the group out of Argentina to Italy, Buela was able to return to the order.  Once Buela returned, Fr. Solari resigned as superior general and Buela was unanimously elected to his previous post.  (Background on Fr. Solari here, here, and here.)

Did Fr. Solari willingly resign?  Was he forced out?  Was he ever really in charge or was Buela always pulling the strings?   As is the case with other important aspects of the Institute's history, the details of Fr. Solari's resignation are unclear.  What is clear is that, like so many other IVE priests, Fr. Solari left the IVE.  He became a diocesan priest in Peru and his whereabouts are currently unknown, though one would imagine he may have retired by now.

A Very Bad Sign

There are far reaching implications when a superior general not only resigns his position, but leaves his order altogether.  Priests and seminarians had taken a vow to obey this person (who was also under perpetual vows) only to see him leave.  So to simply say this is scandalous is an understatement.

Beyond scandal, the real question is what conclusions should be drawn from this departure?  Was Fr. Solari right or wrong to leave the Institute?  If he was wrong, what does that say about the prudence of the IVE?  They can't even pick a faithful leader for their own group (remember, they unanimously elected him), yet they want you to trust your discernment and vocation to them?  To take a vow of obedience to them?

And what if Fr. Solari was right to leave?  If he was right to leave then he had to be compelled by serious issues concerning both Buela and the Institute - issues serious enough that they should be disclosed to those in formation and those discerning with the order - but obviously no disclosures have been made.

Right or wrong, Fr. Solari leaving a group where he was superior general for six years is evidence of severe problems within that group.  These aren't things the Institute discloses or likes to talk about (or is even honest about when questioned), but this is information you deserve to know before you ever give them your trust or consider entering.

The IVE's Persecution Comes From Within

You see, the IVE like to dismiss talk about their troubled history by saying it's the result of "persecution by mean liberal bishops."  Well, what about Fr. Solari?  Who persecuted the IVE into unanimously voting him superior general?  Who persecuted Fr. Solari into leaving the institute to join a diocese?  (We can guess the answer to those two questions pretty easily and the answer is not "mean liberal bishops.")

The IVE's problems are real and they come from within.  Fr. Solari's departure is proof of that.  They aren't stories made up by "anonymous detractors" and they aren't hardships imposed by liberal bogeymen.

But does the Institute ever disclose these issues to those who deserve to know?  Have they attempted to address the people causing these issues?  The answers are no and no.

Clericalism and the Constitution... (Again.)

Source: Yahoo

These reports on Pope Francis were a good excuse to write about a problem that has been on our mind for some time: Clericalism at the Institute and it's seminary.

Clericalism and the Constitution

By now many of you have heard how Pope Francis - way back when he was only an Archbishop - used to ride the subway, take the bus, cook his own meals, and even help clean up when his fellow Jesuits met.  It must surprise IVE seminarians and nuns that an Archbishop from Argentina would do these things, because that's certainly not how their Argentine IVE superiors behave.

Instead, within the Institute there is an aura of elitism, chauvinism, and - most troubling - the regular practice of clericalism.   Most write it off as cultural, but it is not.  Neither is it normal among religious communities.  As we have mentioned before and as we will explain below, this is another example of how the Institute's constitution is not something they follow - rather, it is simply for show.

Clericalism at the Institute includes, but is not limited to, the two most obvious and easily verifiable examples we cover below.

Mealtime Practices

The simplest and most easily verifiable instance of this clericalism is their mealtime practices - it's also a nice contrast with stories of Pope Francis, as Archbishop, cooking his own meals and cleaning up at his order's events.

At the seminary, the seminarians eat poor tasting, expired, and often rotting food, frequently eating the same meal over and over for days at a time.  Meanwhile, the priests - though eating in the same area, although at separate tables - have a different meal of better quality, fresh food, complete with wine and dessert.  The priests don't ever take any part in serving or cleanup either - that's all for seminarians or sisters to do. 

This is easy to verify.  Simply attend one of the Friday "Eutrapalia" pizza nights at the seminary and you'll be observe these points: there are "special" pizza's reserved for priests only, priests are served by seminarians, priests get the option of wine and dessert, and when it is done only seminarians clean up.

Wanting to set up a hierarchy of food is debatable, but claiming that you always choose the worst (see their constitution below) when you actually demand the best available and leave the worst for others is simply dishonest.  They force their seminarians to live out the vow of poverty according to their constitutions, but the priests themselves actively flaunt this vow in front of all the seminarians who are under their authority for formation.

Sisters Chauffeuring Their Spiritual Directors

Another instance of this clericalism is a strong contrast to images of Pope Francis on the subway: the IVE priests don't exactly use public transportation.  The Sisters at the novitiate are at least a 40 minute drive from the seminary (with no traffic) and the priests from the seminary give spiritual direction to these sisters.  However, instead of getting in one of the many cars at the seminary and driving to the sisters and back, the IVE priest makes a sister drive to pick him up, drive him back to the sisters house, then back to the seminary, and then drive herself back to the novitiate.  So a sister spends three hours in the car, so that the IVE priest won't have to drive himself for 1 ½ hours. He makes the sisters spend twice the money on gas, so that he will not have to spend half of it.

This is not only clericalism, but it's also a very poor stewardship of resources.  Three hours of the sisters time is wasted driving unnecessarily and the cost of gasoline for the trip is doubled (remember the big vans they drive are not very fuel efficient and gas is not cheap!)

IVE Consitution: "Choose The Worst"

What makes this all even stranger is that common IVE practices like these (and many others) are in stark contrast with the Institute's own constitutions which says in paragraph 67 that a member should "prefer for his own use and to choose, whenever possible, that of least value, the least pleasant and the most uncomfortable" and "accept with joy, for the love of God, privations even in necessary things for the sake of holy poverty."

Just for Show, Not to Follow

This may indeed surprise the seminarians, but it does not surprise us, because as we have pointed out before and will elaborate further in the future, the IVE superiors don't really follow their own constitution.  They just use the document to manipulate those in their care - especially seminarians and sisters.  

They demand what is for all purposes blind obedience from those in formation, while they wouldn't obey Pope Francis when he was their Archbishop in Argentina.  They force poverty on seminarians (who are mostly undocumented immigrants, essentially trapped at the seminary) while the same seminarians pour them wine and serve them dessert on a nightly basis.  

Many of the seminarians and sisters probably think it's just a "cultural thing", "Argentinians are just funny that way", which is why the humility and simplicity of Pope Francis - now the most famous Argentine of them all - must come as quite a shock.

The Real Danger

Now a priestly office certainly deserves deference and respect from others.  Often people will want to honor Christ by being kind to a priest and there is nothing wrong with that either.  The problems start when people begin to feel entitled to or demand special treatment.  This is the path to priestly narcissism.  

A sense of "being special" fostered by the IVE prior to and during formation, turns into a sense of entitlement as a priest.  This entitlement leads them to justify all sorts of behavior, even openly flaunting their vow of poverty in front of their seminarians on a daily basis and demanding service from them like waiters at a restaurant.  In their eyes, receiving the priestly character at ordination isn't seen as an added responsibility, instead it is treated a license to flaunt the rules.  

Ultimately, like Christ, a priest is called to serve, not to be served.   Unfortunately, rather than provide an example to those in their care, the IVE priests lord it over them.  They set a bad example for seminarians and damage their formation in the process.  This is doubly unfortunate considering that we are currently so in need of properly formed priests.  

How Many Leave the Institute?

Update: On the Spanish web, the high attrition among IVE priests is a recurring theme and rightly so.  Such a high number of people leaving after ordination indicates a real problem within the order.  Not a minor problem, but a fundamental one - especially considering how new the congregation is.  

What we wrote below we wrote very early on in our investigation.  Since that time we have seen more documentation and data.  All of it supports the 40-50% attrition number we arrive at below, though it suggests that the total number of both current priests and those that have left is higher than our original estimates below.  

There are only two groups that likely have access to the exact numbers: the IVE leadership and the Diocese of Segni-Vetrelli in Italy where they are headquartered.  Given the IVE leadership's issues with the truth we'd be reluctant to take anything they say at face value, but if you speak Italian it wouldn't hurt to contact the diocese of Velletri-Segni in Italy.  The Vicar of Clergy there may be able to help.  

Below is our original post:

One question readers ask is "If it's so bad, why don't more people leave?"  The answer is that many, many do.  

Priests are leaving the Institute of the Incarnate Word early and often because of the same problems we highlight on this blog. 

A tremendous number leave during formation, though - we would argue - not through the usual process of discernment.  A large number of IVE priests leave as well (even former Superior Generals).  We calculate this number to be greater than 40% and potentially over 50% (see below for more info.) 

This isn't simply a case of "living in a fallen world".   This is a spectacularly high rate of a attrition for a religious order.  It's especially striking because it's such a young order.  They've barely been ordaining priests for 20 years and already such a high number are leaving.  It's not just an example of people breaking vows either:  many still feel called to the priesthood - just not with the IVE.  In fact, there are single dioceses in the US with as many as 6 ex-IVE priests.  

At least 40%, but potentially greater than 50% of all ordained IVE priests have left

Let us explain how we arrive at the attrition number above (also covered in our "Irregularities" page.)  The IVE for the past several years has claimed a number of around 350 priests.  We believe this refers to the number ordained, not the number that are still in the order.   If you look at their number of parishes (96), multiply that by 2, and add in a few for the seminaries and "monasteries" and you arrive at around 200 active priests.  200 out of 350 means 57% stay, 43% leave.

Since the "350" figure has been used for a while and since they are ordaining new priests every year, the actual number of priests ordained should have grown.  This means the real attrition rate should be even higher then the 43% we estimated above.   We do know that the early class of 1996 saw 9 out of 17 leave the IVE, giving a 53% attrition rate (<-- Use Google Chrome to translate this link), which is probably what the long-run rate will look like.

The Institute covers this up, because admitting this drop-out rate would undermine their carefully crafted image of a "young, joyful, growing order."

Given these readily available facts it is strange the IVE remains adamant about the "350" number.  Of course, admitting to the problem would potentially do a lot of damage to their image and their recruiting, but it seems a serious enough issue that it should at least be disclosed to those "discerning" with the order.  That does seem the ethical thing to do, doesn't it?

Unfortunately, that's not how the Institute of the Incarnate Word operates.  In the end they only do what is good for the Institute:  they deny and hide the truth and attack anyone who tries to expose the problems or help those hurt by them.  The IVE does everything it can to maintain the image of a healthy, happy, growing religious society when the reality is quite the opposite.

Letter From Rome

We received the below email with permission to publish and it is so thorough we are publishing it below unedited and in its entirety.   Our impression from this mail is one of familiarity.  The IVE has the same problems worldwide.  These aren't isolated experiences.  

I just want to let you know of my experience with IVE as a former novice and seminarian in Rome (Segni and Montefiscone). I found the Institute to be very arrogant and there was a distinct lack of charity there. The Institute believe they are the only faithful order in the Church and that everyone else (especially diocesan priests) are unfaithful, or at least lacking in something. They will constantly criticise other orders within the Church. The following are some of my concerns with the Institute in point form:

•  There is no clear distinction between the interior and exterior forum - superiors will frequently act as spiritual directors and confessors to postulants, novices and less regularly seminarians. This is in breach of what the Church lays out for priestly formation.

•  The Institute frequently breaks its own constitution and spirituality guidelines. For example, the constitutios state that the novice master and seminary rector muct be a minimum of 5 years fully professed and be at least 30 years old. The last 3 novice masters in the Italian province do not meet these basic requirements. The present novice master was appointed just months after his ordination.

•  The constitutions and spirituality state that Sundays and solemnities must be celebrated as feasts but we work every Sunday; in fact in my time with the Institute we worked every Sunday and even on Christmas day and Easter Sunday which I found ridiculous.

•  The Institute take a 4th vow of slavery to Our Lady but in practice there is no clear evidence of this devotion. In novitiate we did pray the rosary as a community daily but in the seminary it was left up to the discretion of each seminarian. But other than this there was no clear visible signs of our committment to live lives of slavery and devotion to our Blessed Mother.

•  The first thing to be sacrificed in the daily routine was Eucharistic adoration - on days where things were busy, or we were travelling somewhere, or something unexpected cropped up, the first thing to be cancelled was adoration. I've lost count of the amount of times adoration was cancelled or shortened ven though the constitutions and spirituality state we must have at least an hour of adoration daily. Interestingly, I cannot recall work ever being cancelled, although I can remember many instances of it being extended.

•  When we travelled to St. Peter's for papal Masses we never queued along with the other members of the public, seminarians and priests queuing. We were always told by our superiors to slip into the queue close to the front. This often led to friction with people who had been queuing for several hours. I was always very embarrassed by this.

•  We were told not to speak to women (even our own Sisters within the Institute) and we were frequently told in talks that the greatest obstacle to our vocation was our family.

•  There was a culture of spying within the Institute which was encouraged by superiors and this led to division and mistrust among members. There were a number of clicks or groups within the novitiate and seminary; those who were willing to spy and report on others (even lie) received special treatment, whilst life was mae extremely difficult for the others and obstacles were placed in the way of their progression.

•  There was a punishment system where you received an asterix for being late or a minor infraction of the rules and these led to puishments such as a weeks service in the kitchen. Interestingly, the "spies" never seemed to receive any punishments.

•  In the seminary the superiors would publish on the notice board what each individual seminarian was costing the Institute, putting pressure on seminarians to ask friends and family to donate money to the Institute.

•  There was clear favouritism within the Institute - some seminarians even got single rooms whilst others where placed 10 and 12 to a room.

•  The priests an deacons ate separately to the seminarians and received better quality food than the seminarians (in full view of the seminarians).

•  There is  huge drop-out rate within the Institute which is not publicised by the Institute. Whenever someone decides to leave or is asked to leave, the superior in his night talk to novices/seminarians often speaks very badly of the person who leaves, on some occasions even accusing them of betraing their vocation and calling (as though the only genuine call was to the Intitute).

•  The Institue's philosophy and theology is largely based on St.Thomas Aquinas. In itself this is good but the Institute hold St. Thomas' work above reproach, at times I felt they placed him above the Magisterium of the Church. For example, in class if you challenged St. Thomas' opinion on the Immaculate Conception or the infusion of the soul, you were attacked for your comments. The Institute would never concede that St. Thomas did not reach the truth about the Immaculate Conception as the Church now understands it.

•  Some favoured seminarians were actually teaching some of the modules in the seminary, especially the philosophy modules, even though they had no qualification to do so.

•  The Institute is not open to even the smallest criticisms; they are extremely proud and arrogant.

•  There is a lot of talk about God's justice and about punishment but very little mention about the love and mercy of God.

•  There is no privacy: you share a small bedroom with 10 to 12 others and a study room with 10 to 12 others also; emails are read and I suspect phonecalls monitored.

•  The Institute goes on trips that only a few can afford (i.e. Argentina) and so those who can afford it head off for a month whilst those who can't must remain behind and continue to work in the seminary. Many get to go home twice a year on holiday whilst others, especially the Africans can only go home once every 2 years.

•  The Institute claim they set up missions even in places where there is no hope of benefactors or vocations, but this is the absolute minority. In information talks we were told by the Provincial and General Superior that priority is always given to setting up missions in areas where benefactors for the Institute and future vocations were plentiful.

•  Many seminarians and novices engage in physical mortifications such as scourging and wearing hair-slips around their waists. I have no problem with this practice but I alway preferred meditation on the Passion in adoration to this (as requested by Our Lord to St. Faustina).

•  Many novices and seminarians in the Insitute are very unhappy but are just trying to keep their head down until ordination. Many are living in fear of being kicked out if they don't appear to go along with everything in the Institute.

These are just a few of the points I would like to make to anyone considering a vocation with the Institute. Whilst the doctrine taught within the Institute is for most part orthodox please don't be fooled by this because the truth without love is meaningless, and there is very little charity or love evident within the Institute. I know because I've experienced this first-hand. No doubt members of the Institute may try to dispute what I've written here but I know that everything I've written is fact because I've experienced this first-hand. You have my permission to publish these points on your blog. I will not give my full name for the sole reason that many of my friends are still in the Institute and I don't want to make life anymore difficult for them than it already is.

Pope Francis and the Institute

Note: Since writing this post we've learned a lot more about the IVE's troubled history.  We encourage you to get the full story on hour History page here.

AN ARGENTINE POPE

We can't be sure of the Institute's reaction to an Argentine Cardinal being selected as Pope.  We imagine they are putting a good face on the situation - ie."Yay Argentina!" -  but in reality this was probably not good for the Institute.  His selection has spawned a new round of research and the information we've come across is, um, very interesting.

According to Argentine news reports here and here, Cardinal Bergoglio, now Pope Francis, was the Primate of Argentina during the first investigation into the IVE.  You can read the articles yourselves (use Google's Chrome browser to translate them automatically), but we'll summarize and give our take below.

After reading these articles it is becoming clear that the Argentine Bishops, led by Cardinal Bergoglio - now Pope Francis - shut down the IVE (probably for the same reasons we decided to start this site.)  They stopped the ordinations, shut down the seminary, and put restrictions on the founder Fr. Buela and the other IVE priests.  So when the Institute of the Incarnate Word tries to blame their Argentine problems on "liberals" and "left-wingers", it's the Pope they are blaming.

What is also news to us is that Cardinal Sodano - the same Cardinal Sodano that got busted taking bribes from and supporting the Legion of Christ's disgraced founder Fr. Maciel - is the person that helped Buela and the Institute get out of their problems with the Argentine Bishops.  

Again from Argentine Press:

In efforts which would not have been outside of (former Argentine President) Menem's former ambassador to the Vatican and current gentleman of the Holy See, and Archbishop Aguer Esteban Caselli, Buela got the powerful Cardinal Angelo Sodano to protect him. Not only did the Vatican reverse the order closing its seminaries, but it managed moving the IVE headquarters to Italy, to the diocese of Velletri-Segni, 60 kilometers south of Rome, where since mid-2001 has its Generalate and Buela parent lives.

In the words of the IVE, Sodano is "so close to our Institute."  The Italian Bishop where they are based even clarifies that he made the decision to let the IVE in "with the continued support of His Eminence Cardinal Sodano..."  Sodano even helped them get the Novitiate opened in Chile.

These moves by Sodano were a "great humiliation" and a "slap in the face" to the Argentine Bishops.  So much so that then Cardinal Bergoglio even traveled to Rome to meet privately with Pope Benedict and express his concern over influence that Ambassador Casselli (and his ally Sodano) still had in appointing Bishops (such as the lone Argentine supporter of the IVE, Bishop Hector Aguer.)  Like an excerpt from a Godfather movie, Casselli, Aguer, and Sodano coordinated together and the Sodano and Casselli families even had close economic ties. 

As the saying goes, "Judge them by the company they keep." If you judge the Institute of the Incarnate Word by the Cardinals that help them out, Cardinal McCarrick and Cardinal Sodano, it doesn't paint a pretty picture.

TO SUM IT UP:  Then Archbishop Bergoglio, now Pope Francis, tried to shut the IVE down 15 years ago.  Cardinal Sodano - the same guy that shielded the pervert Maciel in exchange for bribes - went over the Archbishop's head to keep the IVE seminary in Argentina open, find them a new diocese, and even help them open their novitiate in Chile.

Don't take our word for it.  Go to http://www.google.com.ar/  and search for "Bergoglio Instituto Verbo Encarnado" (or "Bergoglio Sodano" or "Sodano Buela" or "Sodano Instituto Verbo Encarnado") for much, much more on this and don't forget to use Google Chrome to translate for you automatically.

There is much more on this we will publish as time permits.

Discerning with the Institute - Another Perspective

The Institute of the Incarnate Word will not require any discernment prioring to entering. "Not sure? Don't worry." They will say, "We are different than other orders or the diocese. We don't make you wait. Come and discern here."

They will make young Men feel special by telling them that God may have chosen them for the priesthood. They may even create a sense of urgency telling you "God doesn't want you to wait… he wants you to hurry… saints answer promptly." They wrote a whole book on that.

Neither are they going to require you to fill out an application or do any sort of formal interview process that might slow things down. Some that enter do, but the majority do not fill out or supply any paperwork until after they have already quit school, quit jobs, broken off relationships, and entered. They do not even ask whether you have any canonical impediments to ordination before they let you enter.

Once you are a member of the Institute of the Incarnate Word, any steps toward discernment are still discouraged. What you will be told daily from day one is that you must "persevere in your vocation" even though most there have never discerned what theirs is.

If questions come about you not being sure about your vocation you will be told "You shouldn't worry about discerning your vocation right now. Your superiors will decide for you if you have a vocation. They have a lot of experience in this".

If the question continues to bother you will be told "You just need to practice obedience. You need to stay busy, accept your cross, and not think about it too much, the devil is crafty and will try to steal your vocation" And so on. There is no mention of the "D" word after entering.

If it comes up during spiritual direction, they will tell you not to worry about it and, in addition to the above, to wait for your 30 day spiritual exercises retreat (which comes every other year.) That's where you are supposed to discern your vocation.

Then when you get to the the 30 day retreat and the state of life comes up, they will say "if you are here then you have already discerned your vocation and we are going to skip this part." (really???) So when you get to the part about following the devil or following Christ, the explicit assumption is that following Christ is following them, and leaving is following the devil. One's vocation is never discussed.*

That is how you can go from "I want to serve God better" or "I want to find out my vocation" to spending years at a seminary without ever having actually discerned anything.

(*Note: this is with regard to the spiritual exercises they give to those already inside the order. We are not sure how they approach the spiritual exercises for those not belonging to the order, but based on the feedback we have received they do pressure attendees towards vocations during these retreats, contrary to St Ignatius' instructions.)

The Purpose Of This Site Covering The Institute of The Incarnate Word - A Reminder

As a reminder, the purpose of this site is not to condemn the persons inside the IVE. Most of these men are well intentioned and trying to fulfill the Will of God in their lives.  In fact, it is for these men and those who might consider joining in the future that we started this site.  The issues and problems we point out here are not victimless.  People are seriously hurt.  People do lose their faith as a result.  Our purpose in this is to help those that are hurt and prevent further injury.  

The issue is that the IVE is going down a dangerous road than can, and most likely will end - some would say already is ending - badly. 

The Institute fails to police itself and many of its problems have become institutionalized, pardon the pun. When these issues were brought up inside Argentina, they left.  When these issues are now brought up from the inside they are ignored and those who bring them up are punished.  This is why the public exposure here in the US has become necessary.  Many are being hurt and there is no sign of change from inside.

We can draw from history and our own common sense to see that if an organization fails to police itself it will eventually be exposed by an outside source.  An example of this is the recent failure of some in the Church to take care of the abuse crisis.  This led to the secular media exposing it, resulting in those responsible finally being removed from their positions and preventative policies being put in place.  This also led to many grave scandals, unfair media reporting, and a stain on the reputation of the Mother Church that remains to this day.  It would have been better for all if those in charge had not taken the easy way out, but had corrected the problem themselves, before it morphed into a large public scandal.  

It is always better if matters are handled in house - the sooner the better. The IVE has failed to do this. We are trying to report in a manner that is as fair and objective as is possible, in the hopes of their correction on certain very important issues.  Issues that, when previously existing in other religious societies, have lead to individuals being hurt and scandal in the Church. 

(The above is only an example to show how those failing to correct their own errors will eventually have their errors made public - it is in no way to imply that there is abuse of a sexual nature occurring inside the IVE.  That is not what we have seen, nor do we state or imply that anywhere on this site.) 

The way the IVE tries to apply the Church's principles are often flawed, while they may deny, or minimize this, what they cannot deny, though they may try to minimize it, is that they do not follow their own constitutions, this is gravely problematic. Even though some would think these misunderstandings, ignoring Church law and certain aspects of their constitutions are small and unimportant, Aristotle, and later St. Thomas, explain “a small error in the beginning leads to a large error at the end.”  We are pointing to how these small errors are starting to cause large problems. 

This small errors have to led many, of those in-charge of formation, to exhibit arrogance, pride, a  sense of entitlement, elitism, and subjective following of the rules - Ecclesiastical and their own.  Like their US benefactor, retired Cardinal McCarrick, the IVE leadership and founder have also exhibited a very limited respect for Church authority.  Many of the priests are only following the formation they themselves were given, but this doesn't make the errors any less objectively grave.  These errors have all been seen before in other Religious communities and have led to grave scandals in the Church.  

The Church has had enough scandals and no one wants to see Christ's bride smeared again. We hope that those in power at the Institute will have the humility to amend their ways, fix the small errors in the beginning - which are leading to bigger problems, follow the rules of their own constitutions, and take care of those who have placed themselves in their charge. 

We are dealing with souls and eternal consequences, this is not a game, and they need to remember that.