Schoenstatt: Position on the accusations against Father Joseph Kentenich Interview with Father Eduardo Aguirre, postulator of the cause July 3, 2020 Enrique Soros de Santos The International Schoenstatt Presidium issued a statement on July 2, 2020, motivated by the accusations expressed against the founder of the Schoenstatt Work, Father Joseph Kentenich, first in an article by Alexandra von Teuffenbach in the weekly periodical Die Tagespost on July 2, 2020, and then in the press releases that followed throughout the world.

The information contained in the mentioned article, which supposedly "has not yet been evaluated" - as Father Juan Pablo Catoggio writes on behalf of the Schoenstatt Presidium - "is not new to us; it was fully included in the documentation about the Founder of Schoenstatt in connection with the temporary separation from his Work (1951-1965) and is being thoroughly studied by the ecclesiastical authorities in the context of the process for Kentenich."

Old accusations

Two articles have just been published in the German press, written by researcher Alexandra von Teuffenbach, who claims that she has brought to light documents that are part of the cause of beatification and canonization of Father Joseph Kentenich, in which members of the Secular Institute of the Schoenstatt Sisters of Mary accuse him of abuse of authority, of being manipulative, and of systematically impeding the sisters' freedom of conscience. There is also an accusation of sexual abuse.

Even though these accusations are about information known for well over half a century, today they are presented as if they were new, and as if because of this they have the strength to question the moral reputation of the father and founder of the Schoenstatt Movement.

Some media outlets have taken advantage of the occasion to expose the case as if they were questions which were unknown until now, inclining to support the position of the possible commission of abuse on the part of Fr. Joseph Kentenich, without "giving him the opportunity to defend himself," that is, without taking into account the arguments of the priest and the evaluation of the Church and its conclusions in this regard.

Interview with Fr. Aguirre, Postulator of the Cause of Canonization

Zenit has consulted Father Eduardo Aguirre, postulator of the cause of canonization of Fr. Joseph Kentenich, in order to know his version of this topic and the position of the Church on the serious accusations mentioned.

Zenit: Fr. Aguirre, were the accusations that now come to light about Fr. Kentenich known?

Fr. Aguirre: Yes, these accusations were collected and examined during the diocesan process of Fr. Kentenich's cause, several years ago, and during this process they were answered and clarified. Therefore, the claims which Von Teuffenbach makes appear as something new that has just come out publicly, but they are not.

These accusations were made before the Visitator, Stein, in February 1949, during the that he carried out in Schoenstatt. Afterwards, these accusations had an important influence on the Apostolic Visitation that was later carried out by the Holy Office, which after the ceased to exist and was transformed into the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, and which determined, as an administrative measure, Father Kentenich's exile in , United States, for 14 years, until he was rehabilitated by Paul VI in 1965 and could return to Schoenstatt.

After the visitation, Father Kentenich wrote a letter to the German in which he denounced a mechanistic thinking in the Church, which is opposed to an organic thinking, loving, and living, which he promoted in his communities. A Church from the time before Vatican Council II was not prepared to understand this presentation, and this letter seriously influenced Fr. Kentenich's being sent into exile.

Zenit: Why is this coming to light now?

Fr. Aguirre: The processes of beatification and canonization must be carried out under secrecy; that is, the investigations into the life and work of the whose cause is underway cannot be disclosed. Both the postulator and the members of the ecclesiastical authorities appointed by the bishop who is instructing the cause (episcopal delegate, promoter of justice, theologians, members of the historical commission, notary, etc.) must take an oath to keep the contents of the process secret. Therefore, the testimony of the witnesses and what is being investigated in the case could not be disclosed.

Alexandra von Teuffenbach, independently of the process being conducted in the of , and as a result of personal investigations in the recently opened archives of the Holy Office, analyzes the documents that have to do with Fr. Kentenich's cause. She announces them as news to the public, as if these accusations were not known. This does not correspond to the reality of the cause. I don't know why she puts things in this way. I suppose it is because she did not know about the process, and that is why she thinks they are new.

Zenit: Was Fr. Kentenich's exile a punishment? What was he formally accused of, to result in sending him into exile?

P. Aguirre: In the Apostolic Visitation which the Holy Office carried out in Schoenstatt through the visitator, Fr. S. Tromp SJ, between March 15, 1951 and July 11, 1953, no formal accusation was made of alleged crimes against Fr. Kentenich. Therefore, the Holy Office did not hold any trial against him and there was no sentence or punishment. The same Holy Office clarifies that Fr. Kentenich's exile in Milwaukee is an administrative measure to clarify the situation of the Schoenstatt Work.

Zenit: Which bishop carried out the Canonical Visitation of Schoenstatt?

P. Aguirre: Father Kentenich himself had asked the Diocese of Trier to conduct a study of Schoenstatt; of its spirituality, its pedagogy, and its structure, so that the contribution it wanted to offer the Church would be known and valued. Instead of a study, the Bishop of Trier conducted a Canonical Visitation (a formal act of ecclesial investigation), through his Auxiliary Bishop, B. Stein. This visitation, which was the first, took place between February 19 and 28, 1949. As a result of the visitator's report and Father Kentenich's response - seeking a discussion and an ideological confrontation of the bishop's criticism regarding the pedagogical practices applied in Schoenstatt and of the position he himself occupied within his foundation - the Bishop of Trier asked the Holy Office to intervene. That is how the second visitation, the Apostolic Visitation, came about.

Seven years after the death of Fr. Kentenich (1968), it is the same Bishop Stein, now the of Trier, who opens Father Kentenich's process of beatification in 1975, after having obtained the nihil obstat of the . Both he and the Holy See were aware of these alleged abuses by Fr. Kentenich, but they did not prevent the cause from being opened. This means that there is a supposition or possibility that Fr. Kentenich could be declared a by the Church. If these accusations made during the 1949 visitation had been considered true and proven, the cause could not have been opened.

Thorough investigation: no legal case opened

In view of the concern that the accusations against Fr. Kentenich had not been seriously investigated by the Church, we have consulted Fr. Angel Strada, former postulator of the cause of canonization of the priest, who says that "the Church's investigation was exhaustive and concentrated on analyzing the person and the pastoral practice of Fr. Kentenich. First Bishop Stein did it, starting in February 1949, then Fr. Tromp, starting in 1951, and later, with less intensity, Father Albers (1963), appointed by the Congregation for Religious.

The Congregation for the Cause of the and the Secretariat of State also had to investigate him, in order to give the nihil obstat to the opening of the process of canonization on February 10, 1975, and this investigation is precisely the goal of the process of canonization. Dozens of witnesses are called to testify for and against the process, all the documentation in the archives is collected, and a historical commission studies the life and virtues of the candidate for canonization. Yes, undoubtedly, from every point of view, the investigation was profound and exhaustive."

And in conclusion, as Father Eduardo Aguirre affirms, "no formal accusation was made of alleged crimes against Father Kentenich. Therefore, the Holy Office did not carry out any trial against him and there was no sentence or punishment."

English version of the article published in Spanish by Zenit Español