Legion of Mary Philadelphia Senatus

  “Watch your language!” That’s not just good advice in general, but even when it comes to making reference to Legion work! We are used to speaking about the active work done for two hours each week as “my assignment.” But is that “my” really accurate? According to the Handbook, it is not. The reason? It is not because the Legion views every assignment as done in pairs, but because it views every assignment as done by the praesidium.
Indication that this is in fact the perspective is manifest in the Legion system which, firstly, does not allow legionaries just to do whatever spiritual work they please for the requisite time each week, but demands instead that this spiritual work be selected and imparted by the president in the name of the praesidium. It is also conveyed indirectly by the Legion reality of auxiliary membership which inserts into each and every deed undertaken by active members the helping, praying influence of dozens of others. Legion assignments are therefore never a matter of individual effort alone, but involve the fullest spiritual support through the praesidium.
I raise this point today asking us to keep this truth in mind when performing our assignments and especially when reporting on those assignments. According to the Handbook, those reports have as one of their main purposes “[connecting] the work with the praesidium” (H, 111). They become the way “we” hear about the work “we” are doing together as a group – and NOT what “I” have done with the help of another legionary. They enable “us” as a group the opportunity to “pay a spiritual visit to every person or place recounted as having been the subject of the work” (H, 123). They allow “us” as a group the chance to supervise and become involved in the efforts being undertaken by a few. Like a sport’s team which gathers as a unit (and not just those who “played”) at half-time and after a game to assess strategy, correct errors, and arrive at a refined approach which assures victory, so we as a praesidium gather in our praesidia after every assignment to assess the approach, make necessary adjustments, and decide upon the next course of action – all in the name of reaching our apostolic goals.

This mutual involvement in the works of the praesidium certainly begs that reports be prepared in high quality and with sufficient detail by those who undertook the assignment. It also challenges the others of us present to receive these reports in a two-fold manner. The first is that of attentive listening to every report as if it were our own – because it is. The second is that of a willingness to offer helpful comments – that is, for someone in the group to say something after each report other than “nice job.” According to the Handbook, members should also be offering remarks on one or all of the following five areas:
 the success of the work;
 the nature of the effort, including insights into the approach adopted;
 what can be learned from what was done – positively or negatively;
 any challenges for taking the work to the next level; and,
 accountability for any neglect in any form.
All this should be done by us in a spirit of charity and even more in a spirit of justice since “we” – and not just “they” – are responsible for the work and its achievement.
Michael Jordan, the NBA Hall of Fame star player, once said, “Talent wins games, but teamwork wins championships.” Such wisdom should inform our approach to Legionary spiritual combat. We must remember that more is asked than individual piety and skill, but the work of a team where all members of the praesidium show interest and do their part such that all the works undertaken will be victorious for the good of souls.

March 18, 2018/Allocutio to the Philadelphia Senatus/Rev. Frank Giuffre Reading: Handbook: Chapter 19, Number 19 (“Work of each one is a concern of all.”): p. 123

Emily M. Axelrod in her book, Let’s Stop Meeting Like This: Tools to Save Time and Get More Done, makes this observation: “No matter what role you play in a meeting, how you show up in that role is critical to the meeting’s success.” I would have to agree with Ms. Axelrod – with one clarification. Perhaps even more critical than HOW we show up for a meeting is THAT we show up for the meeting. Even the best prepared individual can do absolutely nothing at a meeting never attended!
Convinced of this, the Legion in its “Standing Instructions” includes not only the adjective “punctual,” but also that of “regular” in connection with “attendance at the weekly meeting of the praesidium” (H, 109). It wants members to know their duty can be compromised not just by failing to show up on time for the meeting, but even more by failing to show up at all for the meeting!
In justifying such a precept (which it terms the “primary obligation” of each legionary), the Handbook curiously does not appeal to the good effects regular attendance has on the individual member. It assumes that each understands that, just as clay only takes shape as a useful vessel when pressed and shaped continuously by the potter, so the member can only assume the form of a true soldier of Our Lady when “pressed and shaped” week after week by the Legion system. Instead, the Handbook appeals to the effects meeting attendance has on other members. It begs the legionary not to forget that, when an individual is absent from the praesidium’s meeting, absent with him or her are the prayers, insights, reports, and comments which the Holy Spirit could have used to build up members in Legion identity and for the Legion cause. Fellow members therefore are that much “less” because “more” were not sitting at the table, fulfilling their unique and essential roles.
To ratify this point in the minds of members, the Handbook presents a few fascinating images. One of these recalls how a magnifying glass can only cause a fire when the various individual rays of the sun at one’s disposal are gathered together and focused through a magnifying glass (H, 70). So it works with the Legion. Only when the various individual members at a praesidium’s disposal gather and are focused through the business of the meeting will members be set afire in holiness and for service. Faithful attendance has that much significance for the group as a whole.
Someone once said that half of life is showing up. I am not so sure about that. But I can say that so much of love is. That is why, when we “show up” regularly for Legion meetings, we are manifesting our great love for God and for our fellow Legion members in caring enough to honor our commitment. May that kind of love lived loyally at our weekly meetings ignite a fire that sets members ablaze for Jesus and Mary.

February 18, 2018/Allocutio to the Philadelphia Senatus/Rev. Frank Giuffre Reading: Handbook: Chapter 11, Number 4 (“The Primary Obligation”): pp. 70-71

St. Paul relates the following in his letter to the Galatians: “But when the time had fully come, God sent his Son, born of a woman, born under the law” (Gal 4:4 NAB, with emphasis added). This verse certainly attests to the fact of the Incarnation. But does it not also witness to God’s punctuality? Does it not show how disciplined and “on time” God is? He in fact writes these traits on the page of creation which operates, not haphazardly, but with organization and precision. Even the Sacred Scriptures regularly reveal God’s orderliness and timeliness. Genesis 1, for example, affirms that God made the whole world and that He did so systematically – according to a plan in which certain creatures appear on certain days and in a definite progression. This is how it is, then, when it comes to God. There is no chaos or lateness. There is only order and punctuality.
Drawing, I’m sure, inspiration from the Lord God’s own ways, the Legion of Mary in its “Standing Instructions” makes the first duty of each member the “punctual attendance at the weekly meeting” (H, 109). And it presents in the Handbook the strongest of cases as to why this should be – why legionaries should be on time for meetings.
Firstly, punctuality sets the right tempo for the meeting and works to prevent “disorder” in its approach (H, 120). The Legion knows that rushed and chaotic starts lead to rushed and chaotic proceedings. It knows that efficiency and exactness in arriving on time and starting on time lead to sessions where prayers are said calmly, the spiritual reading and discussion are conducted meditatively, reports are presented thoughtfully, and members listen and participate undistractedly.

Secondly, punctuality demonstrates respect, charity, and humility for the other brothers and sisters present at the meeting. Respect and charity are communicated in the member’s desire not to disrupt the focus of others by a noisy entrance which only draws attention away from the business at hand and onto the tardy individual. Humility is conveyed in a legionary’s awareness of being no more special than others and of needing to obey the same rules like others – rules which require punctuality for every member without exception.
Lastly, punctuality trains the member in habits beneficial in doing Legion work. Specifically, it fosters the practice of being present at the assignment for the entirety of the time expected, thereby making the member fully available to assist all the souls brought there by the Lord and preventing the tragedy of missing any who were present when the legionary should have been!
In making my remarks today, I remind us that there are certainly good reasons for being late and that we must not judge members who are. At the same time, we must also be honest to admit reform may be needed in this area, especially when an officer raises concerns over a member’s repeated tardiness (and keeping the meeting timely is a prime responsibility of the officer).
There is a famous turn of phrase: “Better late than never.” The Legion, seeking higher standards in the Lord’s service, would instead say something different: “Better never late!” So let us strive to be God-like in our approach to the weekly meeting: let us come fully in time.

January 21, 2018/Allocutio to the Philadelphia Senatus/Rev. Frank Giuffre Reading: Handbook: Chapter 19, Number 12 (“Punctuality Paramount”): pp. 120-121

High in the Alps – according to a story – stands a monument honoring a faithful guide who perished while ascending a peak to rescue an amateur stranded there due to inclement weather. The memorial plaque reads:  “He died climbing.”

Legion members are asked to “die climbing,” too: to embrace a relentless pursuit of excellence in their service to Jesus through Mary.  As the Handbook reminds us: “The call of the Legion is service without limit or reservation….” and where “excellence is not aimed at, a persevering membership will not be achieved” (H, 15).

One expression of this legionary drive for excellence is the setting of meaningful and achievable goals within praesidia and by councils – the goals which we, on a regular basis, report to our governing bodies.  When prayerfully prepared and wisely worded, these can become an effective means to scaling new heights through constant improvement, necessary correction, and creative expansion.

But what does such a goal look or sound like?  According to business experts and others, each will have five characteristics – characteristics whose first letters combine to make the word “SMART.”  They are “specific,” “measurable,” “action-oriented,” “realistic,” and “time-bound.”

• “Specific” means having a clear and definite wording. For example, it should not merely relate, “We need to do better,” but should mention in what specific areas improvement is desired – for example, “We will strive to increase the number of active members?”
• “Measurable” means inclusion of tangible numbers/amounts. Therefore, more than saying, “We will strive to increase the number of active members,” it will relate how many are desired.  For example, “We will strive to increase the number of active members by two.”
• Next, it is “action-oriented.” This implies providing the “how” behind the “what.”  Using the previous example, the goal should be augmented to read, “We will strive to increase the number of active members by two through interaction with parish members after every weekend Mass once a month.”
• In addition, a goal is “realistic.” It does not ask for the impossible, nor does it fail to adequately challenge.  For example, a good goal does not seek the founding of a hundred new parish praesidia in a month.  It also does not call for the addition of only one active member in a decade.
• Lastly, a goal is “time-bound.” It includes a deadline.  This would require insertion into the statement of a temporal limit.  For instance, “We will strive to increase in a year’s time the number of active members by two through interaction with parish members after every weekend Mass once a month.”

Someone once wrote, “When we are motivated by goals that have deep meaning, by dreams that need completion, by pure love that needs expressing, then we truly live.”  Our hope in the army of Our Lady is that, through the motivation of prayerfully prepared and wisely worded goals, we will truly and fully “live the Legion.”  For that sake, let us never stop “climbing,” using as our ropes the goals we courageously prepare and enthusiastically fulfill.

December 17, 2017/Allocutio to the Philadelphia Senatus/Rev. Frank Giuffre

Reading:  Handbook: Chapter 4, Section 5 (“Must finish the race (2 Tim 4:7)”:  pp. 15-16/first three paragraphs)

There is an old saying that what we are is more important that what we do: that is why we are not called “human doings,” but “human beings.” Our value is intrinsic and is not earned by our works.
Many will wonder why the Legion does not operate on a “works only” philosophy. Why does there have to be a weekly meeting? The response is very simple. The Legion is not about doing, but about being. It is about building up members in holiness, not merely about keeping them busy. This is affirmed in the first paragraph of Chapter Two of the Handbook where it is specified that the Legion’s objective is “the glory of God through the holiness of its members” (H, 11). And holiness is not something we do, but something we are. Building members up in holiness, challenging members to holiness, and training members in habits of holiness is the reason why the weekly meeting is “the heart of the Legion” (H, 71) and not the assignments.
I like to view the meeting as a formation program, like the Seminary before the priesthood. Although the spiritual needs in our world are many and serious, Mother Church does not ordain men to be priests the day after applying and getting accepted by their bishops. She knows that it would make for disaster if men were sent out to work without bonding with the Christ of their work – without maturing in their humanity, growing in their knowledge and practice of the Faith, and gaining needed pastoral skills. It is similar in the Legion. The meeting forms the member in union with Jesus and Mary and in the ways of Jesus and Mary so that, as each faces the many desperate situations in the field, he or she will be the most powerful instruments possible in fostering the world’s salvation.
Fr. Fran Peffley has said that what the obligation to Sunday Mass is to a Catholic, the requirement of attending the weekly meeting is to the Legionary (Inside the Legion of Mary, p. 63). The Church knows we cannot live the week to the fullness without the fruits of the Sacred Liturgy. And the Legion knows we cannot be holy and spread holiness to the fullness without the meeting. Let us therefore respect and attend our weekly meetings, letting them build up our Legion beings – not just our Legion doings!

November 19, 2017/Allocutio to the Philadelphia Senatus/Rev. Frank Giuffre Reading: Handbook: Chapter 11, Section 5 (“The Weekly Meeting of the Praesidium”: pp. 71-72)

What is the difference between “could” and “should?” Grammarians tell us that “could” expresses what is possible, while “should” relates what, among the many possibilities, is the right thing to do. Legion of Mary members must sort out “could” from “should” as they ponder which active works to pursue in their praesidia. After all, there is so much one “could” do in a parish, but, given Legion priorities (for works of conversion) and the limited number of members, the bigger question is what we “should” do in that parish.

As we face making that decision, we would do well to scrutinize the work itself against the following points raised in today’s Handbook reading. There we read that the Legion works which “should” be done involve:  1. acting for the sake of the “particular needs” of a parish, not merely what serves one’s own preferences;   2. honoring the primacy of performing the “difficult work”;    3. seeking “progressive pioneering” or that willingness to do more, give more, and emerge from a group’s “comfort zones” for the sake of the glory God;    4. never acting out of that “prudence” which would have members select the least risky or least demanding option, preferring the heroic to the trivial;    5. and opting for works which are “necessary to souls” and, in the process, edify others.

With regularly, the question arises, “Is a certain task brought before us an authentic Legion work?” We must know that the real question which we should be asking in its regard is not whether it could be done, but whether it should be done. If it “measures up” to much of the criteria listed above, it is certainly worthy of performance. If it does not, then it might be best to do it on one’s own, outside the Legion, or to seek someone else in the parish to do it, leaving the Legion free to pursue the more pressing work for souls.

The Servant of God, Frank Duff, once made the following statement: “Mary, the Queen of the Legion, has the office of mothering mankind. We have the privilege of helping her, and she depends on that cooperation. It is woeful if in such wonderful circumstances we only take in hand the things of lesser consequence, leaving the multitudes in real deprivation” (ML, 13). Friends, that is what really is at stake in the debate about what “could” be done in the Legion: making sure that our works bring our Mother closer to her children most in need of her love and help. For her sake and their sake, let us be sure we decide rightly … and then do what “should” be done for the sanctification and salvation of her sons and daughters.

October 15, 2017/Allocutio to the Philadelphia Senatus/Rev. Frank Giuffre Reading: Handbook: Chapter 37, Introduction (p. 231 – paragraphs before no. 1)