Article on Opus Dei
#1
" One thing that Dan Brown, author of The DaVinci Code, seems to have gotten right is the essential character of the Newchurch organization known as Opus Dei. JPII, never known for his discernment about people (just remember how many heretics, sex criminals, and embezzlers he appointed to the hierarchy), rushed through on October 6, 2002, one of those highly questionable "presto" political "canonizations," of Josemaria Escriva de Balaguer, the founder of Opus Dei, who had died only thirty years previous, even though there were many who tried to present counter-evidence to the "canonization."

Since JPII had done away with all the checks and balances in the process, however, including the elimination of the Devil's Advocate, Escriva was forced through for political reasons. Escriva anticipated and developed thirty years before Vatican II a revolutionary, new, secular theology of the laity and accepted the principle of pluralism and indifferentism: a Novus Ordo Seclorum. In 1982 John Paul II created this group as a "personal prelature." Suspiciously, this act occurred in the same year that the wealthy sect allegedly had transferred almost $1,000,000,000 into the Vatican Bank, bailing it out of an embarrassing bankruptcy.

It has been reported that JPII was actually groomed by Opus Dei for the papacy, so it is not surprising that shortly after his election, he made Opus Dei a "personal prelature," responsible only to him. As his #2 man, he appointed an Opus Deista, Angelo Cardinal Sodano, as Secretary of State. This man remains in that position also under Benedict-Ratzinger. He also appointed Joaquin Navarro-Valls as head of the now immensely powerful Vatican Press Office.

In further confirmation of what has become an overwhelming amount of evidence from around the world, Dr. John Roche, who joined Opus Dei as a numerary while at university, has written on the subject of his experience. Gradually, Roche came to see that Opus Dei "was entirely self-centered, sectarian, and totalitarian, and that it was misleading the Church about important points of its character."

Without success, Roche tried to draw the attention of Church officials to the dangers found in Opus Dei, so he contacted The London Times, which published a study in January 1981 and concluded that the Church should forbid Opus Dei from recruiting any more members until after a thorough investigation had been made. London's Basil Cardinal Hume, in December 1981, published his guidelines for Opus Dei, requesting that it cease recruiting youngsters under 18, not prevent its members from seeking outside spiritual direction, and not prevent those who wish to leave from doing so.

Roche warns that it is easy to be impressed with Opus Dei's beautiful buildings, the energy of its well-dressed members, and their intense loyalty to Novus Ordoism. In reality, he says that it is guided by fascist ideas turned to religious purposes. While living, the founder Balaguer demanded that new recruits accept the fact that Opus Dei was revealed to him by God, was "absolutely perfect," and that he was infallible in matters of the "spirit of the work." The members are told that they have no need to think. In fact, they are kept so busy with praying and working that there is neither the time nor the solitude for quiet thought.

Financially, the members are left with only a pittance after turning over their paychecks to Opus Dei, and even that pittance must be accounted for, though Opus Dei makes no accounting of its own financial affairs. Opus Dei follows a strange "apostolate of not giving." It does not give alms to the poor, and the members are not allowed to give presents to anyone, but are pressed into forming friendships with the wealthy in order to obtain contributions.

Opus Deistas are part of the New Order Church. Some "conservative" Novus Ordinarians, however, have been duped by Opus Dei into thinking that it is a "conservative," even traditional, organization. It is neither. It is a shrewd modernist device. Opus Dei is a chameleon organization, being liberal or conservative, whichever benefits its agenda.
"

http://www.traditio.com/comment/com0506.htm
Reply
#2
The main charism of Opus Dei is the personal sanctification of its members in their ordinary daily lives. Prior to coming to Fisheaters the only criticism of them was from liberal types who were jealous of them for their success, 
Reply
#3
No doubt that liberals would attack anything that would appear to be Catholic. The argument on the other side is that they want to make Holy Mother Church a society based on the laity.
Reply
#4
(05-10-2016, 12:55 PM)Ultron2032 Wrote: No doubt that liberals would attack anything that would appear to be Catholic. The argument on the other side is that they want to make Holy Mother Church a society based on the laity.

It is based on the laity growing in holiness through their ordinary lives. Apparently they are not for everyone. 
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)