question about Opus Dei

[kinneret]

I would second the recommendation for John Allen’s book: ‘Opus Dei: An Objective Look Behind the Myths and Reality of the Most Controversial Force in the Catholic Church’.

It was written by a widely-respected and non-biased Vatican journalist and presents a very thorough and balanced look at the major criticisms often directed towards Opus Dei. Most such criticisms, it seems, are derived from over-simplifications and misunderstandings. After finishing the book, I was left with an even greater admiration and appreciation for the Work.

 

[Mark12]

In civil legislation, contracts are commitments which are binding and due
process is involved in their termination.

With regard to various issues raised in this thread I would like to make a few observations - in a personal capacity, although I am a member of Opus Dei.

Members of Opus Dei make commitments, not vows, but these are binding under
the laws of God’s Church and the due processes of that Church’s laws are
involved in their termination.

To terminate those commitments unilaterally would be contemptuous of that
law, and would constitute an offence against God.

The Catechism of the Catholic Church and the Code of Canon Law explain the
binding nature of the Church’s laws and the degrees of gravity involved in
ignoring or disregarding them.

With regard to the allegation of secrecy, the Statutes of Opus Dei state in
article 89, section 2: “omnino simul vitat secretum vel clandestinitatem” //
at the same time completely forbids secrecy or concealment.

Members of Opus Dei abhor secrecy.

With regard to freedom in relation to choosing a priest for Confession, St
Josemaría constantly insisted that faithful of the Prelature should always
feel free to confess to whosoever they chose. But in the same breath, he
always pointed out the common and supernatural sense of choosing a confessor
who was familiar with the spirit underlying the vocation they had chosen to
respond to.

Michael,
Thanks for bringing some answers and congrats for your 50 years in Opus Dei!

The secrecy that I was referring to is not about the members, it’s about the Statutes.
As you know, they’re not openly available for anyone. They’re keep under lock. So if there is nothing to hide, why are they not easily available?

Regarding the confession, you may also recall that Opus Dei’s founder said (regarding Opus Dei members going to confession with non-Opus Dei priests): "Si tú hicieras esto, tendrías mal espíritu, serías un desgraciado. Por ese acto no pecarías, pero ¡ay de ti!, habrías comenzado a errar, a equivocarte. Habrías comenzado a oír la voz del mal pastor, al no querer curarte, al no querer poner los medios» (de nuestro Padre, Meditación, 12-III-1961) , which in English reads: “If you did this, you would have bad spirit, you’d be miserable. That act would not be a sin, but woe to you!, You’d have begun to err, to make mistakes. You’d have begun to hear the voice of evil shepherd, for not wanting to heal, for not wanting to put the means”.

So if there is no problem to have a confessor outside Opus Dei, why the admonition that you are having bad spirit or that you’ll be miserable for doing this?

Finally, I want to clarify that Opus Dei members’ “per se” are only the priests, as a Personal Prelature (based on the Code the Canon Law) is composed just by the Prelate and his priests.
Lay people only “cooperate” with the Prelate and his priests, so they are not members.
So which kind of commitments they can have that bind them with the Prelature if they are not members? If they’re not members why would be an offense to terminate something that is not even valid?
I’m an attorney, so I also like to base my assertions on concrete facts or laws, but I do not recall to find anything about this in the Catechism or in the Code of Canon Law as you mentioned above. Could you please be more concrete?

Wampa, to avoid more confusions, I just updated my profile and I included “Catholic”.

Happy Labor Day!

 

[Julia_Mae]

It was written by a widely-respected and non-biased Vatican journalist

It might be a wonderful book, but I’m pretty sure this is an oxymoron. “Vatican” already means an agenda. What we need is a book by an atheist. That would be objective!

 

[Edward_H]

It might be a wonderful book, but I’m pretty sure this is an oxymoron. “Vatican” already means an agenda. What we need is a book by an atheist. That would be objective!

Would it really? I don’t think your conclusion follows.

Allen is good but he works for the National Catholic Reporter, which has its own angle too.

 

[Julia_Mae]

Members of Opus Dei make commitments, not vows, but these are binding under
the laws of God’s Church and the due processes of that Church’s laws are
involved in their termination. .

I second Mark’s motion or… well, whatever. I’d like to have a reference to the Canons that bind a lay person to Opus Dei by personal commitment that is binding in any way under Canon Law. I can only find this one:

Can. 296 Lay persons can dedicate themselves to the apostolic works of a personal prelature by agreements entered into with the prelature. The statutes, however, are to determine suitably the manner of this organic cooperation and the principal duties and rights connected to it.

This is from Ut Sit which erected the Prelature:

III. The jurisdiction of the personal Prelature extends to the clergy incardinated in it, and also—only in what refers to the fulfillment of the specific obligations undertaken through the juridical bond, by means of a contract with the Prelature— to the laity who dedicate themselves to the apostolic activities of the Prelature: both clergy and laity are under the authority of the Prelate in carrying out the pastoral task of the Prelature, as established in the preceding article.

and this from the Declaration (II) that accompanied the encyclical which says the laity don’t alter their canonical status:

b) the laity incorporated in the prelature do not alter their personal situation canonically or theologically. They continue to be ordinary lay faithful and act accordingly in all matters and, specifically, in their apostolate;

So they should be going to their own parishes, subject to their own Bishops except in the specific things they contract with the Prelature. What do they contract, exactly?

 

[Julia_Mae]

Would it really? I don’t think your conclusion follows.

Allen is good but he works for the National Catholic Reporter, which has its own angle too.

Everyone does, Edward.

 

[Wampa]

Wampa, to avoid more confusions, I just updated my profile and I included “Catholic”.

Thanks for the clarification!

I would second the recommendation for John Allen’s book: ‘Opus Dei: An Objective Look Behind the Myths and Reality of the Most Controversial Force in the Catholic Church’.

I agree. I found the book extremely balanced. It is definitely a worthwhile read for anyone who wants to hear both sides of the story on Opus Dei.

 

[Faithdancer]

It might be a wonderful book, but I’m pretty sure this is an oxymoron. “Vatican” already means an agenda. What we need is a book by an atheist. That would be objective!

Atheists…objective about Catholicism? I hope you are being flip…

 

[Faithdancer]

So, Edward, what has your personal experience with Opus Dei been?

What has *your * personal experience with Opus Dei been, Julia Mae? Seriiously, please let us know!

 

[Mark12]

Thanks for the clarification!

I agree. I found the book extremely balanced. It is definitely a worthwhile read for anyone who wants to hear both sides of the story on Opus Dei.

Wampa,

John Allen’s book is good (I’m a little bias, because the same way that I consider “the Da Vinci Code” totally fabricated, John Allen’s book falls short on its delivery), but you know what? After all his interviews and studies about Opus Dei at the end of the book he made some comments and suggestions on things that they should consider to change or improve. None of them was take in consideration by Opus Dei.
More, you’ll not find his book in any of Opus Dei’s centers. How I can say it? They do not take criticism lightly.

A good sample: John Allen says that he was surprised how many numeraries asked to talk to him “off the record”. All of them want it to share with him the things that Opus Dei needs to change. But they didn’t want to say it publicly because the concept of self-criticism is not part of their vocabulary, and they may be perceived of having “bad spirit” (as they say internally when someone says something that they consider against Opus Dei’s spirit).

 

[Faithdancer]

I don’t understand why the expectation of going to Reconciliation only with Opus Dei priests, when one has made the vocation to be a member of Opus Dei, is a problem. Why would you make a vocational choice, and then seek other spiritual direction outside your vocation? That is not commitment to the vocation.

 

[Edward_H]

What has *your * personal experience with Opus Dei been, Julia Mae? Seriiously, please let us know!

I came in contact with the Work about 5+ years ago, after having gone to a non-Opus Dei silent retreat that sort of “kicked me in the rear” with regard to pursuing holiness, and based on the realization that I needed a serious prayer life. I had run across St Josemaria’s writings in snippets from a Daily Word emailer I subscribed to years and years ago. The Daily Word mailers were based on the Navarre New Testament. My wife surprised me with a present, the whole series of St Josemaria’s writings (from Scepter, comes in a little cardboard case).

So, following the impetus from the retreat…I looked for and found the Work in my area and started attending monthly recollections, receiving help from a great priest from Opus Dei.

From the very first recollection I thought: ‘this is what fits me, what I need to struggle with’. This was the way forward for me toward holiness in my life. Not long after that I become a cooperator, and then fairly recently, I became a supernumerary. I attended cooperator circles early on as well, and now supernumerary circles. The formation continues, of course, until we die, as should be so with all Christians.

I have found that at each Recollection there are always a few substantial and practical points brought out in the meditations that just push me on (kicking but smiling) toward growth in one or two areas. It’s always more than I can possibly absorb and put into effect. But it’s all good, solid grist.

The Annual Retreats (I think I’ve gone to 5 now) are also always enormously helpful.

The Norms take some adjustment and sacrifice but ‘do’ what they’re supposed to do…spur on a far more continuous conversation with Our Lord. Father and son chats.

Am I getting any holier…I think that is the wrong question to ask. The better question to ask might be “Does your wife want you to quit?” And the answer is: she’d kill me if I stopped going!

My priest early on told me “your job is to make your wife the happiest woman on the face of the earth”. He said that point of help leaning forward, smiling. And as I finished my internal whine “what about me”…it all started to make great sense. She can’t be the happiest unless she is close, very close, to God. Beatitude. And the more I focus on her, the less I focus on my own stupid self…and that makes us happier together.

She is a Cooperator herself.

 

[Julia_Mae]

What has *your * personal experience with Opus Dei been, Julia Mae? Seriiously, please let us know!

I never said I had any personal experiences with Opus Dei.

 

[Mark12]

I don’t understand why the expectation of going to Reconciliation only with Opus Dei priests, when one has made the vocation to be a member of Opus Dei, is a problem. Why would you make a vocational choice, and then seek other spiritual direction outside your vocation? That is not commitment to the vocation.

It’s a problem from the moment that you can not choose which one of them to go, the confessor is assigned to you.
“Mutatis mutandis” is like you join an HMO and they tell you that your primary care physician is Doctor X, you can not choose him, nor change him. It’s true, he’s part of your HMO and he supposedly will give you the same treatment that any other doctor in that HMO, but why you can not have the freedom to go to the one that you like or feel more affinity?
That’s the reason that the Church gave us freedom to choose the priest that we want.
What would happen if the Church would say that you can only go to confession to the priest of the church in the jurisdiction where you live?

 

[Faithdancer]

It’s a problem from the moment that you can not choose which one of them to go, the confessor is assigned to you.
“Mutatis mutandis” is like you join an HMO and they tell you that your primary care physician is Doctor X, you can not choose him, nor change him. It’s true, he’s part of your HMO and he supposedly will give you the same treatment that any other doctor in that HMO, but why you can not have the freedom to go to the one that you like or feel more affinity?
That’s the reason that the Church gave us freedom to choose the priest that we want.
What would happen if the Church would say that you can only go to confession to the priest of the church in the jurisdiction where you live?

I don’t think the analogy holds, because when you make a vocation, whether to a religious order or to a prelature, you make a vocation. There are many priests in parishes in our area who are not lay priests, but are members of religious orders. If one belongs to a particular order or the Prelature and then goes to confession with a priest of another order, I can see where that might be problematic. For an example, who is best to give you spiritual counseling in conjunction with Reconciliation- a priest who shares your spiritual vocation, or one who has a different spirituality? However, if you are speaking only of freedom to choose one Opus Dei priest versus another Opus Dei priest as a confessor, that is a bit different. Perhaps someone else can chime in here and tell us how it is done in religious orders where the members live communally- do they have complete freedom to go to one abbot (for example) versus another for Reconciliation?

Of course, I understand there is a difference between the requirements of being a numerary in Opus Dei, and being a supernumerary. Obviously, while supernumeraries generally make Reconciliation once a month with an Opus Dei priest, the rest of the month they confess to their parish priest. In a sense, though, the Opus Dei priest is “assigned” that one time per month, although he is assigned to everyone who attends the EOR at that particular location.

 

[Faithdancer]

I never said I had any personal experiences with Opus Dei.

Okay, thanks for clarifying. Might I suggest you suspend judgment until you’ve attended an EOR or two? You don’t need an invitation, you can just show up. In my experience they are completely welcoming.

 

[Julia_Mae]

Okay, thanks for clarifying. Might I suggest you suspend judgment until you’ve attended an EOR or two? You don’t need an invitation, you can just show up. In my experience they are completely welcoming.

I haven’t made any judgements. I’ve posted information and asked questions. OTOH, I’ve not seen the listing for the EORs or their locations.

 

[Julia_Mae]

If one belongs to a particular order or the Prelature and then goes to confession with a priest of another order, I can see where that might be problematic. For an example, who is best to give you spiritual counseling in conjunction with Reconciliation- a priest who shares your spiritual vocation, or one who has a different spirituality?

I don’t understand, are you saying that there is a different spirituality in Opus Dei than in the Church? I don’t think anyone is addressing what Escriva said here:

Regarding the confession, you may also recall that Opus Dei’s founder said (regarding Opus Dei members going to confession with non-Opus Dei priests): "Si tú hicieras esto, tendrías mal espíritu, serías un desgraciado. Por ese acto no pecarías, pero ¡ay de ti!, habrías comenzado a errar, a equivocarte. Habrías comenzado a oír la voz del mal pastor, al no querer curarte, al no querer poner los medios» (de nuestro Padre, Meditación, 12-III-1961) , which in English reads: “If you did this, you would have bad spirit, you’d be miserable. That act would not be a sin, but woe to you!, You’d have begun to err, to make mistakes. You’d have begun to hear the voice of evil shepherd, for not wanting to heal, for not wanting to put the means”.

Evil shepherd? A priest of the Catholic Church is being characterized as an evil shepherd? Can that be correct? Or is he saying the devil would be making you go to someone not an Opus Dei priest? See, I can’t make sense of this from the Founder and Saint.

Can you or one of the members explain this quote? I mean, he is not speaking of the practicality in a monastery, where there are limited practical choices, he is saying that to choose, c as Canon Law gives all the right to do, your own confessor who is outside the Prelature… is the result of evil. It leads you to error and misery.

 

[Edward_H]

These boards occasionally find people full with curiosities. No apparent pursuit of betterment, not seeking spiritual development, not seeking help for a friend, etc. Just asking for no apparent reason.

One of the points of growth I’ve learned over the years comes from examining my own curiosities.

• What’s their origin and object?
• What motivates my curiosities?
• Do I follow them too easily?
• Who else could I be serving if I better governed my curiosities?
• How am I serving God by pursuing these curiosities?
• Is my pursuit of curiosities strongly motivated by my love of God?

 

[Edward_H]

Julia Mae.

Regarding the point below from St Josemaria:

“If you did this, you would have bad spirit, you’d be miserable. That act would not be a sin, but woe to you!, You’d have begun to err, to make mistakes. You’d have begun to hear the voice of evil shepherd, for not wanting to heal, for not wanting to put the means”.

Escriva had a knack for raising points of examination in his homilies and other writings that go to the heart of someone’s actions. Having dealt with thousands of people, he seems to have had a sense for some of the excuses that people can raise at different times. And he might plainly call them on it. That is, why they might be less than sincere in confession or in chats. Having watched people make slow turns away from what they had set out to do, he would call them on it plainly.

That’s why I suggested above (several times) that you read some of his spiritual writings…so you might see the connection between a point in a bare statute and a more pastoral point. But that approach to understanding your curiosities doesn’t seem to interest you.