The Ways of Opus Dei (according to Time)

Time Magazine ^ | April 24, 2006 | DAVID VAN BIEMA

[NYer]

[NYer]

And from Carl Olson

The most recent edition of TIME — which is apparently some sort of news magazine — features a dramatic cover with a big headline, "The Opus Dei Code", and an article claiming to tell "the real story" about "the secret Catholic society." Since I'm not a member of Opus Dei (nor am an albino monk, but that's another matter), I'll leave it to others to get into the details of the article. I simply wanted to note a couple of things that caught my attention in reading it. First, I got a good laugh out of this paragraph:

James Martin, an editor at the Jesuit publication America who has written critically about Opus, offers a middle ground between Dale Carnegie and the octopus: "Opus Dei provides members with an overarching spirituality for their life," he suggests. "It's an ongoing relationship that helps buttress and further shape the thought of people who are already conservative Catholics. That's a powerful symbiosis, and there's a personal connection between members, whether they're housewives or politicians. It's not an evil empire, but that doesn't mean there aren't serious issues that need to be addressed."

Hey, come to think of it, that last phrase could be applied to America magazine as well: "It's not an evil empire, but that doesn't mean there aren't serious issues that need to be addressed."

Second, the authors of the piece seem to be fixated on certain words. The word "secret/secretive" appears ten times. The word "conservative" appears eight times (the word "liberal" is used four times). And then there are statements like this:

Opus Dei is not a kind of spiritual pick-me-up for casual Catholics. It features a small, committed membership (85,500 worldwide and a mere 3,000 in the U.S.), many of whom come from pious families and are prepared to embrace unpopular church teachings such as its birth-control ban.

Unpopular among whom (other than TIME reporters, I mean)? The answer is given a bit later:

"I don't believe Opus Dei is either a [cult] or a mafia or a cabal," a senior prelate of another religious community in Rome told TIME. It is just that "their approach is preconciliar. They originated prior to the Second Vatican Council, and they don't want to dialogue with society as they find it." That would not describe the majority of self-identifying American Catholics, who are distinctly postconciliar, with more than 75% opposing the birth-control ban. Their sympathy for Opus Dei might be limited. Some might even feel hostile toward it: church liberals, once riding high, have understood for decades that Rome does not incline their way. They feel abandoned, says Allen, "and whenever you feel that way, there's a natural desire to find someone to blame."

Oh, those good ol' "self-identifying American Catholics," who must identify themselves because in many cases you wouldn't know they were Catholic by how they talked and lived. As for "dialogue" with society, there is copious evidence that the "preconciliar" (what? the Church has had only one Council in its entire history? amazing!) Church had plenty of dialogue with society — but did so with the intent of proclaiming the Gospel and the Truth, not capitulating on matters of faith and morals, as some "American Catholics" have been doing for the past few decades. Come to think of it, a couple of recent popes have also pointed out that true dialogue does not equal indifferentism. Wonder if they knew/know anything about the Second Vatican Council? Well, if there's any question about that matter, I'm sure TIME magazine can set the record straight in a future issue.

Catholic Ping - Please freepmail me if you want on/off this list

[Alberta's Child]

Interesting ping.

[Waverunner]

Wait until they find out about Cestus Dei.

[Terabitten]

My Latin is rusty: Cestus Dei?

[TAdams8591]

Interesting.

[Rodney King]

it has been accused of using lavish riches and carefully cultivated clout to do everything from propping up Francisco Franco's Spanish dictatorship

Accused? Should say "credited".

[wagglebee]

Here is what I want to know:

Why is it that the media thinks that an organization that was founded less than 80 years ago is somehow involved in a cover-up that a NOVEL says happened 2000 years ago?

They didn't do any "exposes" last year about whether or not Benjamin Franklin had put a treasure map on the back of the Declaration of Independence when "National Treasure" came out.

The media is so eager to bash Christianity and especially Catholicism that they will use a work of FICTION to help them. If they want to do an expose of religious fanatics, why don't they go do a hit piece like this on Islam.

[Nihil Obstat]

Some might even feel hostile toward it: church liberals, once riding high, have understood for decades that Rome does not incline their way. They feel abandoned, says Allen, "and whenever you feel that way, there's a natural desire to find someone to blame."

Bingo.

That is the kind of outcome Julian Cardinal Herranz, Opus' ranking Vatican official, expects. Long ago, he says, when he was editing a university newspaper, someone submitted a story claiming that Opus Dei was part of a worldwide conspiracy. Fascinated, Herranz began talking to Opus members, eventually becoming one himself. "That article I read was fiction," he says. "And now I'm here. I became a priest, I came to Rome, I became a bishop, and now a Cardinal. All because I read a fictional story about Opus Dei."

Nice finish to the story.

[Waverunner]

Cestus Dei
militant arm of the Church
in a book of the same name by John Maddox Roberts
Think combat jesuits

[HEY4QDEMS]

Good article bump.

I used to have a co-worker who is a member. He was an average Joe and was never in your face about it like a Chrisna would be.

He simply believes, like lots of people do, that the Catholic church had evolved to become to liberal.

Ironic that the Church of England was founded because the Catholic church was to strict.

[NYer]

The penduluum swings, even in matters of faith :-)

[Mrs. Don-o]

"Ironic that the Church of England was founded because the Catholic church was too strict."

Mainly in the matter of bigamy.

[HEY4QDEMS]

Mainly in the matter of bigamy.

How true, imagine if the CC handed out annulments back then like they do today. There probably wouldn't be a C of E.

[Tax-chick]

Executive summary: People who don't accept Catholic Faith and morals disapprove of a group that does. Women and minorities hardest hit!

[woofie]

I have uncovered "THE WOOFIE CODE"

DOG spelled backwards is GOD


Dont tell anyone

[Mrs. Don-o]

It would have been immensely convenient and "politic" for Pope Clement VII to accede to the English King's vehement desire to put away his wife Catherine. Henry could have made it very profitable to him. England might still be Catholic! Protestantism may have spluttered out on the Continent! Thomas More and John Fisher would have died of old age!

All it would have taken is the dishonoring and humiliation of one ageing, infertile, loyal but unloved wife.

And Clement was a Pope who did not always ---ahem--- act on principle.

But this time he did. And the result? Catastophic. It sparked a conflagration that cost the lives of uncountable people; wrecked Europe; and cost the Catholic Church far more dearly than any other institution.

No good deed ever goes unpunished, as they say.

But the story isn't over. And we will all see how it works out in the end.

[SuziQ]

But Opus' public relations offensive hasn't quite managed to close the gap between what critics say it is about and its own version of the story

Of course it won't because Opus Dei's CRITICS will always find something to criticize!

[conejo99]

Wasn't Catherine a member of the Spanish royal house? They were quite powerful and not to be annoyed.

[Mrs. Don-o]

Catherine was the youngest daughter of Ferdinand and Isabella of Span, and the aunt of Charles V, Holy Roman Emperor. She was a gracious, cheerful, charitable, and deeply religious woman, like her husband fond of music and dancing, literate in three languages (English, Spanish, and Latin), popular with the English people, and utterly devoted to her husband, Henry VIII.

None of this helped her when Henry decided he wanted Anne Boleyn. Henry humiliated Catherine in public, forcibly separated her from their little daughter Princess Mary (whom he officially declared to be a bastard), and locked her up in an isolated, cold, damp place called Kimbolton where he hoped she'd get sick and die: which she did, two years after the divorce.

All of Henry's wives were most unfortunate (he killed two of the six), but I feel sorriest for Catherine because she was good-hearted, and because she really loved him.