Decanonization of Saint Josemaria Escriva

 

DECANONIZATION OF SAINT JOSEMARIA ESCRIVA

The canonization on October 6, 2002 of Josemaria Escriva by John Paul II—also a saint, canonized by Papa Francesco on April 27, 2014—was one of the most controversial during the contemporary era.

In 2002 The Irish Times observed, for example:

“The man that Opus Dei members like to call ‘Our Father’ or ‘The Founder’ has been accused of being vain (he allegedly had the ‘de Balaguer’ tagged on to his name out of petty snobbery), fascist (he allegedly made anti-semitic remarks about the Holocaust, whilst his movement prospered greatly in Franco’s Spain), arrogant and ambitious, as well as having such a loathing for many of the liturgical changes introduced by Vatican Council II that he once considered joining the Greek Orthodox Church.

“A number of Vatican commentators have also expressed reservations about his appropriateness as a candidate for sainthood, reservations which reached a crescendo 10 years ago on the occasion of Monsignor Escrivá’s beatification. In his book, Making Saints, religious affairs writer Kenneth Woodward comments: ‘Escrivá was an unexceptional spirit, derivative and often banal in his thoughts, personally inspiring perhaps but devoid of original insights.’”

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/a-sainthood-cloaked-in-controversy-1.1097801

—Paddy Agnew, “A sainthood cloaked in controversy,” The Irish Times (October 5, 2002)

Before Escriva was beatified by John Paul II on May 17, 1992, Newsweek reported:

“Critics of Opus Dei are bothered by what they see as its secrecy, its air of spiritual exclusivity and a rigid orthodoxy that precludes study of many mainstream Catholic theologians. Membership lists are not made public, nor do most individuals identify themselves as Opus Dei unless pressed. But Opus Dei has the enthusiastic backing of John Paul II, who likes its highly conservative theology and unquestioned obedience to the Holy See. His own press secretary, Joaquin Navarro-Valls, is a member, as is Dr. Raffaello Cortesini, a heart surgeon who heads the medical board that reviews potential miracles for the Congregation for the Causes of Saints.

“Even some Opus Dei sympathizers, like retired Cardinal Silvio Oddi, 80, who served the Vatican for decades in key posts, believe the push to make Escriva a saint has done Opus Dei ‘more harm than good.’ Although bishops are reluctant to criticize Opus Dei openly, says Oddi, many are ‘very displeased’ by the rush to judgment and see ‘no need for the immediate beatification of their founder.’

“Far more serious are recent charges that Opus Dei prevented critics of Escriva from testifying at church tribunals called to investigate his life. Opus Dei officials insist that 11 critics were heard among the 92 witnesses. But several former members have told NEWSWEEK that they were refused a hearing. One of them, Maria del Carmen Tapia, a numerary for 18 years who worked directly with Escriva in Rome, claims the father had ‘no respect’ for Popes John XXIII and Paul VI and regarded Opus Dei as ‘above the church in holiness.’ Tapia, who now works at the University of California, Santa Barbara, says that Escriva warned members that when they died they would not be judged by what kind of Catholics they had been, but rather that ‘we would have to give account to God for having met’ Escriva.

“Miguel Fisac, 78, a respected Spanish architect also tried but failed to give testimony about Escriva, whom he knew for 20 years. ‘He is not the figure they presented to the public,’ says Fisac, whose family helped Escriva flee Spain during the civil war. He remembers Escriva as a ‘man who spoke badly about everyone.’

“In a NEWSWEEK interview, more damning accusations were made by Father Vladimir Feltzman [Felzmann], who resigned from Opus Dei in 1985 after 22 years. He is now an aide to Cardinal Basil Hume, England's Roman Catholic primate. According to Feltzman, Escriva feared human sexuality, believed everything he wrote ‘came from God,’ possessed ‘a filthy temper’ and even defended Adolf Hitler. ‘He told me that Hitler had been unjustly accused of killing 6 million Jews,’ Feltzman says. ‘In fact he had killed only 4 million. That stuck in my mind.’

“Feltzman claims that Escriva was so despondent over the outcome of Vatican Council II that he and his successor, Bishop Alvaro del Portillo, ‘went to Greece in 1967 to see if he could bring Opus Dei into the Greek Orthodox Church. Escriva thought the [Catholic] church was a shambles and that the Orthodox might be the salvation of himself and of Opus Dei as the faithful remnant.’

“Msgr. Flavio Capucci, the Opus Dei priest in charge of Escriva’s cause, insists that ‘all objections have been profoundly studied and satisfactorily resolved.’ Although Capucci acknowledges del Portillo’s trip to Greece, he says the Father had no intention of abandoning Rome.

“While Escriva’s cause is moving swiftly, it has taken some curious turns. Normally, to assess potential saints the Vatican appoints ‘consultors’ who come from the candidate’s homeland. Curiously, eight of Escriva’s nine judges were Italian—a sign, say critics, that the congregation wanted to avoid Spanish theologians, many of whom are known to oppose Opus Dei. Also, Opus Dei has refused to let outsiders see the material on which Escriva’s ‘heroic virtues’ were judged—an unprecedented act of secrecy, say priests familiar with the process.

“Opus Dei officials argue that because Escriva was an international figure and lived in Rome, there was no need to have Spanish judges. But these officials have also claimed that Escriva’s cause had been unanimously approved. However, NEWSWEEK has learned that two of the judges, Msgr. Luigi De Magistris, deputy head of the Vatican’s Holy Penitentiary, and Msgr. Justo Fernandez Alonso, rector of the Spanish national church in Rome, did not approve the cause. In fact, one of the dissenters reportedly wrote that beatifying Escriva could cause the church ‘grave public scandal.’”

https://www.newsweek.com/questionable-saint-197568

—Kenneth L. Woodward, “A Questionable Saint,” Newsweek (January 12, 1992)

The Opus Dei Awareness Network on September 11, 2002 officially published a statement opposing the canonization:

“ODAN opposes the canonization of Josemaria Escrivá de Balaguer, founder of Opus Dei. Based on the testimonies of thousands negatively affected by Opus Dei, and published evidence from various sources revealing the irregularities surrounding Escriva’s beatification and canonization processes, ODAN strongly believes that canonizing Escriva would be a grave mistake which would produce irreparable harm to the Church and leave thousands vulnerable to the deceitful and manipulative practices of Opus Dei.”

ODAN listed 23 specific reasons for its opposition and cited opposing views.

https://odan.org/tw_opposition_to_canonization

—“ODAN – Opposition to Canonization,” Opus Dei Awareness Network, September 11, 2002

Not surprisingly, it has been said to this day that Saint Escriva is deserving of “decanonization,” meaning, his removal by the Roman Catholic hierarchy and the pope in particular from his universal public veneration as a saint.

Is this prospect likely or possible at all?

In the first place, I believe it is theologically possible to “decanonize” a Roman Catholic saint. So I don’t agree with theologians who believe that the act of canonization by a pope is an exercise of the ex cathedra power. Although the declaration that a person is in heaven is certainly a highly authoritative theological statement that is juridical besides, I don’t believe that in the act of canonization the pope explicitly claims that it is a dogmatic teaching. 

On the other hand, I would say that it would be extremely unlikely for a pope to “decanonize” a saint. At most what we have seen in the past is for members of the hierarchy to express doubts about the historicity or existence of one or more saints, like Saints Christopher, Ursula, or George, which Pope Saint Paul VI implied when he “demoted” them by removing them from the General Roman Calendar in 1969. 

If a pope were ever to “decanonize” a saint, there would have to be a significantly populous, aggressive, and cogent campaign among the Roman Catholic faithful to remove the saint from public veneration throughout the universal Church. I don’t see that ever happening in the case of Escriva. He’s too securely lodged inside the system. 

 

Besides, personally, I am morally certain Escriva is in heaven and worthy of veneration according to the official status of saint. I just don’t believe that everything that he said or did is worthy of emulation—in particular, I don’t believe that he is the infallible source of what has been alleged to be a perfectly conceived charism, the so-called “spirit” of Opus Dei.