www.byzcath.org Forums News & Events Church News OPUS DEI Founder 's Canonization

Dear DavidB:

In agreeing with you, I wish people would dig a little deeper for the facts before spouting irresponsible comments or opinions without credible bases.

Dismissing the work of a committed laity, under the guidance of orthodox Catholic prelates, as "Satanic," "exploitative," "fraudulent," and
"unhuman (inhumane?)" may be an indication of utter ignorance.

Thus, the Roman Catholic Church's act of sanctifying the past and present honorable deeds of OPUS DEI's founder becomes unreasonably clouded with distrust.

Now I begin to wonder what "work" Bl. Escriva's detractors have accomplished to merit more weight than his OPUS DEI, and our respect and adulation.

AmdG

Or, maybe, it is a indication of ' "Satanic", "exploitative", "fraudulent", etc.' influences attacking the Church?

There are certainly Saints that have been proclaimed, that I cannot figure out why they are Saints. But that is a long way from believing that the Curia was under "Satanic" influence when they went thru the processes preceeding the canonization.

Sadly, some who call themselves Catholic, come to think that they know more than the Bishops about who's who and what's what.

However, it does seem to me that the the Church, preoccupied as it is by the recent scandals, does not need to be seen as promoting "secret societies".

The Bishops should promote a more open expanation of Opus Dei to the public. There should not be rumors and innuendo, but real information.

After all, if we are to proclaim the Gospel and if Opus Dei is part of that, should it not be proclaimed, rather than hidden?

Have a Blessed St. Francis' Day !!!

John
Pilgrim and Odd Duck

Dear, in Christ,

Reading over the last few posts, I must say that I feel the rules of the forum have been tested. We always speak charitably of one another's Churches, and Church leaders.

I believe that included in "Church" is the list of blessed and holy ones, the saints. Our simple rule should be extended to them, for the sake of charity. Often these saints, confessors, witnesses and holy one are deeply loved by the faithful, and so to attack them is a low blow. That might explain why there is a strong reaction.

Let us refrain from criticizing the saints and holy ones of one anothers' Churches.

Elias, monk

On a very interesting question, I believe infallibility is to be understood exactly as the Church has defined it, concerning some proclamations of faith and morals, which fit certain definite criteria.

It does not include aspects of Liturgy or Liturgical veneration of saints and blesseds. We must avoid the desire to extend this particular mystery beyond the wise and prudent way the Catholic Church has defined it.

Elias

Slava Isusu Christu!

Fr. Elias bless me an arch sinner.

My congradulations to Blessed Josemaria Eseriva de Balaguer on his cannonization.

The events that are going to take place in Rome sound very fun and festive. I especially like the part were all nationalities, young people, and different denominations are coming together to honor this saintly man.

yeah, but you do have to admit, at times it seems like certain people are elevated to blessed status or sainthood due to political undercurrents. I'm sure Alex could think of a few byzantine catholic saints who's cannonization is a little hairy. ( I know I can :rolleyes: )

Peace.

I never said that I dismissed his job, I have always thought that Escriv� did a wonderful labour. I also mentioned his book "The Path".

As for myself I have never been a member of the Opus Dei. I have personal friends who were former members and that's how I knew about their situation. About their priests, I'm sure that they are really orthodox and conservative in morals, faith and doctrine (they have published several books about catechesis which are thought to be better than the new "official" book approved by Rome).
I never tried to be uncharitable, I just disagree with some things. I don't think it is bad to disagree.

Personally, I have grave reservations about Opus Dei and the Beatus...from the first time I have heard of this "community" or what you wish to call it, it has sounded quite suspicious. I have tried to give it the benefit of the doubt, reading a wide spectrum of literature about it, including its own. It just doesn't feel right to me...and there are numerous instances throughout the Church's history where orders and movementments have later been condemned and suppressed. As far as the infallibility of canonization, I have heard it stated both ways. Don

I'm not really addressing this to anyone in particular, but am just throwing this out to everyone.

No one has, to my knowledge, ever really said what they found wrong or suspicious or whatever with Opus Dei and the (tomorrow) Saint Josemaria Escriva. I've only heard their side of things, and the movement seems to be a good one from what I've heard and seen of them. I've read the saint's writings (some of them) and have gained a lot from them. No one has ever really come out to say what's wrong with Opus Dei or why they don't feel good about them; at least, I've never heard of it. So does anyone want to offer any answers? Why do people think so badly about Opus Dei, or why are people leery of it?

Blessed Josemaria Escriva, pray for us unto God that we may increase our Christians deeds both privately and publicly. Amen.

Slava Isusu Christu!

Dear Athanasisu,

banish the thought. I could never believe that any Saint could be canonized for political reasons.

Both the Ukrainian Orthodox and Greek Catholic devotion to St. Josophat is legendary.

Years ago, the Canadian Broadcasting Company (CBC) ran a feature nationally (Fifth Estate?)that questioned some of the organizaton's practices.

I personally was subjected to recruitment pressure by Opus Dei (or perhaps, technically, its youth wing) at the age of about 15 and consider - in retrospect - these tactics to have been manipulative in the common secular sense. I admit to not having though through the morality of these practices.

Christ is in our midst!

Hi Alex.

I am an inquirer to Orthodoxy in the OCA- Will formally be a catechumen at Nativity and God Willing, received at Pascha next.

I do have a problem with the Romanov Family (meaning the Last Tsar and his family) being seen as Martyrs. I can certainly honour them as Passion-Bearers because of the Christian way they went to their deaths. But I have reservations about Nicholas and his policies as Tsar ( his personal anti-Semitism, repression of other minorities in the old Russian Empire). He was a product of his upbringing and of his time. I just can't get with the rose-coloured view of Tsarism that some in ROCOR and others have. I don't see it as necessary to accept the Tsar or be a political conservative to be Orthodox (God forfend!)
On the other hand, I deeply honour St Elizabeth, the Tsarina's sister who was a fascinating person and well as a great Saint who showed the height of Christian forgiveness and certainly provided a model to MOther Maria Skobtsova and others in combining Orthodox Monastic life with service to the poorest of the poor and CONSTANTLY warned her sister of the consequences of her actions and those of her brother-in-law re Rasputin etc. Sadly, to no avail.
Yes, I was a History Major, now a librarian

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Remie:

"About Mgr. Escriv�, some of his radical teachings were a result of his life and what he saw during the comunist occupation of Spain before Franco's victory in the civil war."

Communist OCCUPATION??!

You mean the democratically elected left-wing government of the Spanish republic, which was overthrown by Franco's facist coup, supported by Nazi-Germany and Moussolini's Italy?

(Just the way Salvador Allendes democratically elected left-wing government in Chile was overthrown by Pinochet's coup, supported by no other than the US of A, and the list goes on and on...)

For the record, I'm no fan of socialism, but that doesn't mean that every socialist government is illegimate and equals an occupation!

Christian

Brian:

I have the same problem with the Romanov's canonization and I the Tsarist regime which had a lot of negative aspects. I also disagree with the ROCOR's tsarist possitions (I don't think that all the hierarchs chared them (St John Maximovitch, for example).
We were discusing this in one of the threads.

OrthodoxSWE:

I totally agree with you, the Republic of Spain was absolutely the legitimate regime, I used the term "communist occupation" because it had been used by Escriva, and the Vatican (the Encyclical of Pope Pius XI condemnin the communist dictatorships of Russia and Mexico, and the "communist occupation" of Spain).

About the Opus Dei, they have two kind of members, those who are normal lay people (some of them married) and livbe their normal lives but have to give part of their sallary to the Organization and to bring new members, and those who are totally commited to the Opus (they're called "Numeraries").
They live in special centers, they have their jobs but live there and give all their salary to the Opus Dei, they often practice flagelation and physical punishments (something that Escriva explicitly condemned). The group is sometimes hostile to those who leave the Organization and I don't think this is fair.
I say this because I tried to clarify what I think it was wrong with the Opus Dei, after seeing the reactions of some people, I doubt you'll believe it.