jaykay
Junior Member
Posts: 65
|
Post by jaykay on Dec 15, 2016 1:07:37 GMT
Yes, Hibernicus, what you say about the influence of that Brown person's "works" is certainly true. I confess that I visit Breitbart London a bit (never comment, though) and they reproduced an AFP article beginning as follows: "Bishop Javier Echevarria, leader of the controversial Roman Catholic organisation Opus Dei..."
The comments are, of course, a fever-swamp - that's not criticising Breitbart London, but topics like that do tend to bring out the swivel-eyed. Click-bait, anyway. That site is far from faultless.
|
|
jaykay
Junior Member
Posts: 65
|
Post by jaykay on Dec 15, 2016 1:44:11 GMT
Got cut off... mobiles! Anyway, at least there are a few faithful there to correct the lazy AFP "journalism". There's also one semi-educated tinfoil hat wearer commenting who appears to think that the Church is going to canonise Bishop Echevarria (R.I.P.). The same commenter's avatar is a fluttering Union flag. 'Nuff said. There are still some 17th-century throwbacks over there in the UK (I don't mean the bit north of the border). Luckily they only infest comment-boards... as opposed to Drogheda. Or Wexford.
|
|
|
Post by hibernicus on Dec 17, 2016 18:53:41 GMT
I wouldn't be surprised (without knowing anything about him) if Opus Dei did promote his cause for canonisation. Religious orders and similar bodies tend to promote the cause of their founders and early leaders if they can. I take it the tin foil hat wearer was suggesting he would be automatically canonised without any process, which is a different matter. (Fr Josemaria and Bishop Alvaro did have their Causes processed very rapidly, but that comes from a combination of the post-Vatican II changes in the canonisation process and OD's willingness to put resources into going through the formalities - this is one reason why members of religious bodies have an advantage in having their Causes promoted.)
|
|
jaykay
Junior Member
Posts: 65
|
Post by jaykay on Dec 17, 2016 19:59:06 GMT
Not even that, Hibernicus: he, she or it was just using it as an excuse to vent against "Romanism" and spew out extreme little englander (lower case deliberate) nationalism, of the usual ill-educated variety. Interesting, in an anthropological sort of way. Or as a dead cat is "interesting". You soon move on.
|
|
|
Post by hibernicus on Feb 24, 2017 22:49:54 GMT
Recently read a hostile account of Opus Dei by a woman called Maria Carmen del Tapia, who was a prominent female numerary for well over a decade. I'm not sure what to make of it - it certainly has the bitterness of someone who feels unfairly treated after giving up much of her life (and the fact that she is a bit unclear about what she has done since muddies the waters), but I suspect St Iosemaria's notorious temper (which even his admirers mention) and perhaps a certain Latin tendency to treat women members as second-class, contributed to this unhappy result. One little point she makes, which does not tell either for or against St Iosemaria and Opus Dei, is that the attraction of Opus Dei in late 1940s Spain, when she became a member, was not simply a sort of spiritual equivalent of Francoism as some of the less subtle attackers suggest - it was a sense that in the Spanish Civil War more or less everyone on both sides had suffered and/or done terrible things (there are several passing references to her family being brutally mistreated by the Republicans) and people were looking for something which would redeem and make sense of that suffering. This sounds very plausible; it reminds me of the great wave of religiosity that followed our Troubles of 1916-23, culminating in the particular horror of our own Civil War.
|
|
|
Post by hibernicus on Aug 16, 2023 23:00:20 GMT
An article arguing that Pope Francis's recent changes to Opus Dei constitute an attack on its charism. Bear in mind that the source is a trad website which is frequently dotty and should not be taken uncritically: crisismagazine.com/opinion/what-does-the-pope-have-against-opus-deiA few observations: (1) One feature of Pope Francis's pontificate is to place greater emphasis on the traditional religious orders and to rein in the newer movements favoured by recent Popes. There are legitimate reasons for this - some new movements have exploded horrendously. It will be remembered that during the upheavals in the Knights of Malta it was widely suggested (though not I think finally implemented) that they should be restructured as a religious order with the professed knights as the members. The article appears to suggest that something similar is being indicated for Opus Dei. I might add that one criticism I have heard of Opus Dei is that its refusal to consider itself as a religious order means that numeraries are deprived of the safeguards against arbitrary dismissal etc enjoyed by members of religious orders (though in general members of religious orders do not have much chance of success when appealing against superiors' decisions). On the other hand, if the Jesuits had been obliged to conform to the standard pattern of a religious order they would have said their daily office in choir, which they resisted fiercely and successfully. (2) Opus Dei are often regarded by admirers as the new and superior Jesuits (and it's clear that St Josemaria modelled himself on St Ignatius Loyola to some extent). This may not be appreciated by a Jesuit pope. (3) The ejection of Opus Dei from a Marian shrine in Spain which they have developed and promoted for decades and its takeover by the local bishop certainly sounds harsh - and reminds me of the curate of Saint Jeanmarie Vianney who, having decided that the saint was incapable of handling the pilgrims visiting Ars, suggested that St Jeanmarie should resign and leave Ars, so that the curate could take over and manage the pilgrims. (But why were the pilgrims there in the first place?)
|
|