 |
| Saint Josemaria Escriva (1902-1975) |
THE INFALLIBILITY OF THE OPUS DEI “SPIRIT”
Peter Berglar observes in Opus Dei: Life and Work of Its Founder
Josemaria Escriva (1994):
“...Escriva always insisted that Opus Dei was not his own invention,
that it was not the consequence of a series of speculations, analyses,
discussions, or experiments, and that it was not the result of good and pious
intentions. He clearly implied that the actual founder was God Himself and that
the commission of the task to a young priest was a supernatural act, a unique
grace.”
Many instances may be cited of Saint Josemaria Escriva’s belief in his
own infallibility as an instrument of God, using his own words:
“...as Jesus received his doctrine from the Father so my doctrine is
not mine but comes from God and so not a jot or tittle shall ever be changed.”
“My children I try...to throw out...gold coins, the gold of God…if you
don't pick them up, you are doing wrong, and God our Lord will ask a very
strict accounting from you.”
—Cronica (1971)
“…Opus Dei's] spirit transcends all geographical, historical, social,
or cultural barriers. It transcends as well the evolutionary developments over
the ages. As a result, as long as there are men on earth, there will be Opus
Dei...[our internal law] by the will of God contains everything necessary for
our sanctification and our effectiveness. That is why it is holy, unchangeable,
everlasting. God has entrusted this treasure to us. Our first obligation, then,
is to guard and defend it exactly as we have received it...There will never
come a time, now or in the centuries to come, in which circumstances would
advocate habitually abandoning some part of our internal law.”
—Cronica (1968)
In Opus Dei as Divine Revelation (2016), E. B. E. relates:
“…Escriva has been considered by many Opus Dei members as a historical
figure at the same level as Moses. ...God’s will emanated from Escriva's mouth,
according to a senior director's testimony:
“‘Do what I [Escriva] tell you: as soon as you receive from Rome a note
or indication of mine, you will take that paper and...you will kneel down and
with your hand lay it on your head, saying: “This comes from our founder, then
it comes from God and must be put into practice with all our soul.”’ (J.
Prieto, ‘Una Crisis en el Opus Dei,’ El Pais, April 12, 1992)”
Blessed Alvaro del Portillo (1914-1994), Escriva’s protégé and the
“second Founder” of Opus Dei, roundly curses those who challenge or repudiate
the assumption that Saint Escriva infallibly communicates the Opus Dei “spirit”
revealed by God:
“If someone would try to divert The Work [Opus Dei] from the divine
characteristics that our Founder has given us…if [someone] would try to
undermine The Work of God…he would be entitled to the DIVINE CURSE [all
capitals mine]” (Alvaro del Portillo, quoted in “Meditations,” VI, page 223)
Fortunately, when del Portillo hurls his lurid curse, he does not claim
infallibility.
John Roche, a former numerary, testifies in an unpublished manuscript, “The Inner World of Opus Dei” (1982):
“...As a condition of membership [Escriva] demanded acceptance that
‘The Work’ was divinely revealed to him, that it was therefore ‘absolutely
perfect,’ and that he was infallible in matters of the ‘spirit of the Work.’”
In “The Secret World of Opus Dei,” The New York Times Magazine (January
8, 1984), Henry Kamm quotes Klaus Steigleder, another former numerary:
“...The Founder's instructions go into minute detail, leaving nothing
to chance, including, according to Klaus Steigleder, a 24-year-old former Opus
Dei member, particulars on how to iron and fold the cloth that covers the altar
during Mass.... ‘Their theology stands and falls with the Founder's authority,’
said Mr. Steigleder, who broke with the organization four years ago and who has
just published a soberly detailed account of his association with Opus Dei with
the Zurich Catholic publishing house of Benziger. ‘This is legitimized as
having been received directly from God. He is supposed to have concrete
knowledge of God’s will. This allows them to call continually on authority that
cannot be criticized.’”
Robert Hutchinson, Their Kingdom Come (1997), says:
“...Escriva consistently denied that Opus Dei was his creation. He
insisted that he was only the gardener. This is important to understand. If
accepted, it bestows upon Opus Dei a sort of divine license that, in the view
of its members, permits it to function in a sphere beyond the laws of man.”
We would observe that the Opus Dei “spirit” at best participates in the
fourth level of the Magisterium, with the caveat that in saying so we
specifically refer to Opus Dei beliefs and practices—by far the majority—that
are not intrinsically connected to teachings at the first to third levels of
the Magisterium.
We categorically repudiate Saint Josemaria Escriva’s claim of infallibility as the divinely chosen instrument of a divinely inspired “charism.”
We categorically repudiate Saint Josemaria Escriva’s claim of infallibility as the divinely chosen instrument of a divinely inspired “charism.”
***
See “The Fourth Level of the Magisterium”:
Photo of Saint Josemaria Escriva courtesy of Bolando
ReplyDeletePhoto link:
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Josemaria_Escriva_in_Vatican.JPG
Gonzalinho
THE GURU’S CAT
ReplyDeleteWhen the guru sat down to worship each evening
the ashram cat would
get in the way and distract the
worshipers. So he ordered that
the cat be tied during evening
worship.
After the guru died the cat
continued to be tied during evening
worship. And when the cat
expired, another cat was
brought to the ashram so that it
could be duly tied during evening
worship.
Centuries later learned treatises
were written by the guru’s scholarly disciples
on the liturgical significance
of tying up a cat
while worship is performed.
In Anthony de Mello, S.J., The Song of the Bird (1984), page 63
Gonzalinho
The architectural style and interior design of Opus Dei oratories is neo-Baroque. The Baroque is a European style. It is the style of the Counter-Reformation. It is also the style of the Age of Discovery.
ReplyDeleteThe Opus Dei style glorifies the European. It glorifies European colonial expansionism. It glorifies European colonialism, and everything bad that goes with it—slavery, for example, as well as racism, chauvinism, the exploitation of the natural resources of enslaved peoples, neo-colonialism, and so on.
Neo-Baroque was Escriva’s favorite style. It glorifies him.
Gonzalinho
Private Revelation Does Not Guarantee Truth or Rectitude
ReplyDeletePosted on Amazon.com on September 7, 2000
Minor editing on original post
It is more accurate to say that Opus Dei is a mixture of what is good and holy, along with beliefs and practices that are not only questionable but arguably immoral. No one can quarrel, for example, with the value of prayerful devotion or the practice of Christian asceticism. However, the outright deception of parents in the name of the virtue of prudence clearly transgresses the eighth commandment against lying. The practice of taking parents’ possessions and transferring them to the Opus Dei centers without the parents’ knowledge, a practice that during my stay in Opus Dei was encouraged directly in writing by Father Alvaro del Portillo, citing “the example of our holy Founder,” the then deceased Msgr. Josemaria Escriva, also transgresses the seventh commandment against stealing. What are patently immoral practices can only be justified by misguided casuistry.
The notion that Opus Dei ideology and praxis is entirely the product of divine inspiration is, in my opinion, theologically insupportable. Much of Opus Dei ideology and praxis originates from Blessed Escriva, if we are to believe historical testimony as well as the practice among Opus Dei directors of citing Blessed Escriva to justify what is often called the Opus Dei “spirit.” Yet we must acknowledge that the source of this spirit is Blessed Escriva’s claim to private revelation, which belongs to a very different category of truth from the depositum fidei of the Church. Indeed, in many cases it seems that Opus Dei beliefs and practices, as is evident from Ms. Tapia’s account, may just as well be the product of human judgment, preference, and opinion.
Father Escriva’s beatification and probable canonization do not alter this equation because the papal act of beatification does not necessarily sanction Blessed Escriva’s claim when he was alive that he, as the Founder of Opus Dei, is the sole source and arbiter of a divinely communicated system of belief and practice. One has only to read the history of the Church and peruse copies of original documents to realize that in notable instances, the saints made mistakes that in the context of current knowledge and modern mores might very well be regarded as disgraceful. Some of the saints’ mystical writings also show them to be recipients of private revelations that turned out to be false.
Instead of assuming that what has been passed on from Blessed Escriva is divinely inspired in its entirety, I believe that it is a more accurate theology to recognize that the truth and value of private revelation is manifest in its effects: “By their fruits you shall know them” (Matthew 7:20). It goes without saying that systemic aspects of Opus Dei ideology and praxis have had very negative effects on individuals who joined the organization under the impulse of unknowing idealism, including Ms. Tapia.
Therefore, to cite or criticize the negative aspects of Opus Dei does not necessarily constitute “slander,” an emotionally charged word that tends to obfuscate the issues raised by what may very well be legitimate criticism. Insofar as Ms. Tapia testifies to harmful aspects of Opus Dei that are consistently confirmed by many former members, including myself, she is simply telling the truth.
To be continued
Private Revelation Does Not Guarantee Truth or Rectitude
ReplyDeletePosted on Amazon.com on September 7, 2000
Minor editing on original post
Continued
I emphatically attest that numerous beliefs and practices of Opus Dei have worked to the harm, at times severely damaging, of many former members, including Ms. Tapia, as well as their families, and that this abuse is insupportably justified by invoking a divine mandate. In consequence, it is my sincere desire that Opus Dei reform itself in specific aspects, for the sake of many aggrieved persons and for the protection of the next generation. Reform entails the rejection of important aspects of Blessed Escriva’s idiosyncratic legacy. I earnestly hope that the little I have written will work toward enlightenment and genuine reform. We should not have to wait as long as Galileo did for rectification.
Gonzalinho
Opus Dei is identified with God—a sin against the first two commandments—so that the choice of Opus Dei is represented as the choice of God. This identity is untenable in the absolute sense. Opus Dei is not God.
ReplyDeleteGonzalinho