2005-04-05 17:27
MOSCOW, April 5. (RIA Novosti political commentator Pyotr Romanov) - The death of John Paul II has left many people all over the world feeling like they have lost a father, but the main orphan is Opus Dei, perhaps the best-loved project of the late pontiff, the only Catholic diocese without frontiers. I have met its representatives on many occasions both abroad and in Moscow. John Paul transformed the pariah and "revolutionary" of the Catholic world into a mighty organization, which, depending on sympathies or antipathies, is called "holy men," the "pope's soldiers," or even the "holy mafia."
Opus Dei was the pope's main response to changes in the modern world that were alarming for Christianity. In his apostolic message of 1995, the pope wrote: "Let us not allow Christ's Cross to be abolished, for if it is abolished, man will have neither roots nor prospects, he will be null and void. This is the lament of the end of the 20th century, the lament of Rome, Constantinople, and Moscow." This despairing call was dictated not only by the Christian world ceding positions to, for example, the missionary efforts of Islam, but simply because the world of profit and social injustice, which is immoral from the Christian standpoint, began to prevail.
A colleague of mine, writing about the death of John Paul II, said that the Russians would remember him as a fighter against communism. This is true. But if my fellow citizens knew a little more about the pontiff, they would remember him not only as a fighter against totalitarianism, but as also an equally consistent fighter for social justice.
While John Paul II was alive, the left wing of Catholicism developed, Liberation Theology, at the opposite pole from Opus Dei. I have met the man behind it, Padre Gutierrez from Peru, many times. Karol Wojtyla, who as a child dreamed of becoming a goalkeeper, and then an actor, also worked in a quarry. He learned all about social depths mean and the real weight of a pick axe. He thought that poverty had to be fought, although, naturally, not with Bolshevik methods.
Opus Dei helped the pope. Its founder Jose Maria Esgriva back in conservative Spain in 1928 advanced a fundamentally new interpretation of "holiness" - a major tenet of any church and religion. Esgriva argued anyone could claim and work for holiness and you did not have to enter a monastery, mortify the flesh or eat locusts to do so. Just the opposite. Escaping from temptation by barricading yourself in a cell is far easier than living in the real world, keeping your faith and integrity. Try, said Esgriva, being a saint in life, remaining a good family man, a businessman, or a lawyer. This doctrine, although developed by a Catholic, is quite applicable to modern Russia, and many other countries steeped in corruption and other vices.
While for most of his life Esgriva was a pariah, during John Paul II's lifetime the Opus Dei founder swiftly rose through the ranks, from the Vatican's enfant terrible to an officially recognized saint. The pope saw a new banner for the evangelization of the modern world.
The pope was, of course, perfectly aware that the path from a businessman or a lawyer to a saint is long and difficult, but what mattered was the first push along the way. During Wojtyla's life, the number of cardinals, bishops and mere clergymen in Opus Dei soared. When celebrating Trinity in 1991, for example, the pope ordained 61 clergymen, 20 of them from his best-liked diocese. It is not inconceivable that Opus Dei will attempt to place its supporter at the head of the Holy See during the current conclave. It could succeed.
Does any of this concern Russia? The answer is obvious: yes. Ideas have proven many times that they are material. And ideas do not recognize borders. This is particularly true given that Opus Dei was initially conceived as a "diocese without frontiers." We should not forget the past. It is anybody's guess who reared more atheists - communism or Voltaire. Both entered Russia on foreign passports.
Should we fear the ideological tenets of Opus Dei? I do not think so. There is no need to convert to Catholicism in a predominantly Orthodox country, just as there is no need in the 21st century to seek shelter in monasteries from the temptations of life. Yet to be decent, or at least try to be such, is not forbidden either to a businessman or a lawyer, or even a rich Russian.
So, this is another reason why it is a pity that Karol Wojtyla has passed away. What if his noble idea might have succeeded and led to something worthwhile?
I know very little about this, so if there are any Freeper's that would like to shed light on this subject I certainly would appreicate it. Thanks.
As it happens, while I was at Harvard many years ago I knew the chaplain of the Harvard Catholic Club, Father Porres, who was an early priest of the order in America, originally from Spain. I became interested in Opus Dei and spent a couple of years during graduate school living in their house in Boston. I was not a member, but I got to know a number of members and joined them at their meals and prayers.
One of my classmates at Harvard, whom I knew in the Catholic Club, subsequently became a priest of Opus Dei. I haven't seen him in recent years, but used to run into him fairly often. Another friend from Harvard became one of the lay leaders at the Opus Dei U.S. headquarters in New Rochelle. I have met with him and corresponded with him and had him over for dinner for many years.
I have also have had acquaintances among the Jesuits. I taught at a Jesuit College on the west coast for several years, and for a number of years while I was in college I was a good friend of my Aunt's spiritual director, an Austrian Jesuit of the old school who taught at their Weston center before it turned sour.
The basic teaching of the founder of Opus Dei is that you can live a life of holiness in your family and in your ordinary work. (It's not really that different from the Protestant idea of having a calling or a vocation.) You try to sanctify your daily life and work with prayer, use of the the sacraments, yearly retreats, and the like.
For a while, we had monthly meetings of a small group of interested faculty at NYU, which were led by a member of Opus Dei whom I had met. These ceased, to my knowledge, about ten years ago. I can't really give more details without violating confidentiality, but these prayer meetings probably led to at least one conversion--someone whose faculty colleagues are so bitterly anti-Catholic that he had to keep his conversion a secret.
All the members of Opus Dei whom I have met--and I have met a great many over the years, including some of the American leadership--are perfectly sane, ordinary, conservative, faithful Catholics. None of the outre stories are true, to my knowledge.
Opus Dei has been very successful, whereas the Jesuits have been going down to ruin, and I have often been told, and occasionally have seen evidence, that the Jesuits are jealous of Opus Dei, and likely have worked to spread vicious rumors about them. The Jesuits used to pride themselves as being the Pope's faithful servants, even his shock troops, but for the past 50 years their leadership and most of their members have betrayed their original mission and have given rein to disobedience and dissent. There are still a few wonderful priests in the order, but they are in a distinct minority. The jealousy of the order is understandable but regretable. As the Jesuits have shrunk, the Opus has grown.
So, yes, I've seen a great deal of Opus Dei at first hand, and I have always been impressed by their good sense, their devotion to the Church, and their complete lack of any kind of cultishness. Despite having lived in the Opus house for several years, I was NEVER pressured to do anything I didn't want to do, and when I left to get married and moved on there was never any effort to say that my decision was wrong. Cults don't behave that way.
What do you think of this article?
Here I always thought Opus Dei was a secret society of former freepers.