 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
| My Two Cents About Opus Dei -- Revisted 09/19/07 This essay replaces one I wrote in 2004, just after the onset of The DaVinci Code fever and a couple years before the publication of John L. Allen, Jr.'s excellent and much-needed book about The Work. Although Allen corresponds from the Vatican for the liberal National Catholic Reporter (called by some the "National Catholic Distorter"), he is one of the few in Catholic news reporting who deserves to be called a journalist. In preparation for Opus Dei: An Objective Look behind the Myths and Reality of the Most Controversial Force in the Catholic Church, Allen traveled around the world, digging and interviewing current and former Opus Dei members, people for and against the movement. His book is as objective as it claims to be and I don't think anyone is competent to write or say anything about Opus Dei without first reading it. My 2004 essay anticipated some corrigenda for Opus Dei that Allen concludes are needed. One is Opus Dei's legendary secrecy. Allen reports that prominent Opus Dei member Russell Shaw finds it frustrating. Secrecy always provides a hiding place for scoundrels and as The DaVinci Code demonstrated ( including to many inside OpusDei), if people don't know anything about you, they make stuff up, or readily believe what others make up. Opus Dei now seems to be aware of the image problem caused by lack of communication and is hopefully moving toward being "a house of glass" as Pope John Paul II called for all the Catholic church to be. Lack of transparency has been a problem in other cells of the church's body. Transparency is the only way to go if you truly believe in your church and your mission. And if you have nothing to hide. There are some things that Allen's book touched only superficially if at all. Traces of Islam? The personality of Opus Dei's founder is one. An unnamed Opus Dei insider wished to Allen that members wouldn't try to imitate the founder in every aspect of life. Whether or not Josémaría Escrivá de Balaguer was a saint is not for us to judge, but he was definitely idiosyncratic. Escrivá's Spanish ethnicity also matters here. Spain, it should be remembered, endured several hundred years of Moslem rule. The imprint of Islam was left on the Spanish character and on Spanish Catholicism. The Spanish Inquisition, the conquest, forced conversion and enslavement of the Central and South American Indians, the cruelties of the 1930s civil war, may be more creditable to the influence of Islam than to that of Catholicism. Opus Dei is a very Hispanic order in temperment and culture. Its leadership is Spanish. The prelature's current head was chosen for his place in succession by the founder, so the Escrivá Dynasty is still in place. Most of Opus Dei members are in Spain and South America. Large numbers of its U.S. members are Hispanic. This is one reason why cold-climate Catholics such as those of Irish and Polish descent, who are less fussy and uptight, find Opus Dei and its people hard to stomach. Pyscho-sexual analysis matters here too. Escrivá seems to have been a man who felt horrible guilt about God-given sexual feelings. And about enjoying other divine gifts. He once kept his eyes closed so that he would not enjoy a beautiful day. He likely harbored distrust of himself around the opposite sex. This has translated into Opus Dei's erection of walls--both actual and psychological--between men and women. Because they might misbehave if they spend too much time together. Again, this division of the sexes also smacks of Islamic mentality. The psychological walls are most tragic in a society where male-female relations are already badly damaged by suspicion and distrust. True, married Opus Dei members may have large Catholic families but there are not as many Catholic families as there could be thanks to the hang-ups handed down by Escrivá. Weirdsville I recently went to an Opus Dei event that I'm sure was attended by many other non-Opus Dei members (former White House Spokesman, Tony Snow being one). Having arrived early to get a good seat, I was not too happy when I, and other men present, were told that we would have to give up our seats and move to less comfortable benches in another part of the room, or stand, so that women could have our seats. No matter that men would be separated from their wives et al. with whom they had come to enjoy the event together. This had nothing to do with the integration of faith and life. It was just plain annoying out-of-touch mannerism and a lack of understanding that in the world Opus Dei is trying to blend into, unreserved seating goes to those who get there first. But I went to this Opus Dei affair fully expecting something odd to happen. Any time I have been around Opus Dei people--and I count some among my friends--I have quickly found myself in Weirdsville, where something strange--and usually also irritating--happens. Indeed any time I find myself in Catholic Weirdsville without any known Opus Dei people present, I immediately assume that they're close by. Escrivá wanted his followers to blend in to society. There is the story of him telling one of his priests to take up smoking so he would better resemble typical Spanish men. And of course Opus Dei institutions are comical with their bland names such as "The National Center" that just scream, "This place is some kind of a front for something." Ironically, Escrivá 's followers tend to not blend in even in the church, let alone society. This is another thing that they really have to work on and shedding Opus Dei cocoons would help. Fertile Fields for Trouble Among Opus Dei cocoons are the "centers." Most of the problems in Opus Dei have arisen in these houses where the celibate numeraries live together in groups. Communal, group-living arrangements--whether they be of Opus Dei or of charismatic Christian communities or of addiction support groups--all seem to be fertile fields for trouble. All the charismatic Catholic communities that I know of turned into cults at one point in their histories and had to be cleaned up. One problem with such communities is that the people who sometimes lead them are not fit to be leaders. They don't have the wisdom, experience or the sense to guide others, to--putting it crudely--run other peoples' lives. I think on the whole, the Catholic Church would be better off without these non-traditional, trouble-prone "communities" such as Opus Dei centers. Again if you want to blend into the world, why not live like everybody else, alone, or in a home with your own family? Opus Dei is also one of these outfits in which members practice a non-traditional quasi-religious vocation, a type new in Catholicism. Members adopt some of the disciplines of convents and monasteries--such as celibacy--but they continue to participate in middle-class secular lifestyles by following professions and enjoying other perks that monks and nuns, at least the faithful ones, don't have. Thus we now have the phenomenon of consecrated virgins plastering themselves with make-up and carrying Luis Vuitton handbags. I don't think this is really a good development at a time when many traditional religious have brought scandal to the church by not living lives of poverty, chastity and humility. I think we need more traditional religious who practice poverty chasitity and humility to their fullness. Lay people including families, need to practice these virtues as well and true priests, nuns and monks set much better examples than any of these new "charisms." In religious life, celibacy, believe or not, is the easiest part. It's the poverty and humility that are hard. As I wrote in my 2004 essay, there are many who have done a much better job of presenting holiness-permeated life than Escrivá and his followers have done. But as I also wrote: Opus Dei could turn out to be the thing that saves the Church, pushes it through a major crisis in the distant future and along for the next several centuries. Time, new leadership, a broader ethnic appeal and some reforms could cultivate a beautiful garden, for all to see. |