Vatican-Watcher's Book Goes Beyond the Myths
ROME, DEC. 25, 2005 (Zenit.org).-
In a new book on Opus Dei, an American journalist tries to separate
facts from fiction about the personal prelature.
The volume is entitled "Opus Dei: An Objective Look Behind the Myths and
Reality of the Most Controversial Force in the Catholic Church."
In his research for the book, reporter John Allen of the U.S.-based
National Catholic Reporter dedicated a year to interview members of Opus
Dei in Italy, Spain, Kenya, the United States and Peru, among other
countries.
The author also talked with former Opus Dei members. The result is 400
pages in which this Vatican correspondent, who also works with the BBC
and CNN, touches on topics ranging from the separation of men and women,
to the use of the hair shirt, to the organization's finances.
The book has been published in the United States by Doubleday and in
England by Penguin.
Q: So ... Opus Dei is not as bad as it seemed, you state. Is this the
general idea of your book?
Allen: The aim of my book is to be as objective as possible, on a
subject that's not really known for attracting objective discussion. The
idea is to separate fact from fiction, providing tools for a rational
conversation that's grounded in reality rather than myth or stereotype.
It was not my intent to "convert" readers to any particular position
about Opus Dei, and my experience is that most people come away from the
book without having changed their fundamental impressions of the group,
but perhaps feeling a bit more informed, and a bit less alarmed.
On the other hand, given the highly negative image Opus Dei carries in
some quarters, any serious comparison of that image with reality
inevitably will make the group seem more human, less nefarious, than
some had previously believed.
To take the basic numbers, Opus Dei has a worldwide membership of
85,000, which is roughly equivalent to the Diocese of Hobart on the
island of Tasmania off the Australian coast. The group also counts some
164,000 "cooperators," meaning "supporters."
Outside Spain, where Opus Dei was born in 1928, Opus Dei represents a
tiny, almost invisible, fraction of the Catholic community; in the
United States, for example, there are roughly 3,000 members out of a
total Catholic population of 67 million.
Opus Dei's global wealth, meaning the physical value of all the assets
listed as "corporate works" of Opus Dei, is around $2.8 billion. For one
frame of comparison, General Motors in 2003 reported assets of $455
billion.
Even by Catholic standards, Opus Dei's wealth is not terribly
impressive; in 2003, the Archdiocese of Chicago reported assets of $2.5
billion. The American lay organization the Knights of Columbus runs an
insurance program which all by itself is worth $6 billion.
In terms of power, Opus Dei numbers only 40 out of more than 4,500
Catholic bishops worldwide, including only two members of the College of
Cardinals, and just 20 out of more than 2,500 employees in the Roman
Curia, including only one head of a policy-making agency.
In truth, Opus Dei's potential to "call the shots" inside Catholicism is
far more limited than many imagine. For every Vatican battle Opus Dei
members have won over the years, they've lost others.
Despite being a vaunted recruiting machine, Opus Dei's growth rate is
pretty small. Worldwide they add about 650 members a year, and in some
places they're basically stalled. In the United States, Opus Dei has
hovered at about 3,000 members since the 1980s.
All this suggests that Opus Dei is not as imposing as some of the
mythology would lead one to believe. Ironically, the people most
determined to believe in Opus Dei's occult power are generally not its
members, but its critics, who see its modest structure as masking vast
unseen influence.
Q: Money, power, mortification, "Octopus Dei" ... most of your book
tries to "purify" the whole mystery around Opus Dei. Do you think you
have achieved this clarification?
Allen: I'm not naive enough to believe that prejudices and conspiracy
theories that have formed over 70 years are going to collapse overnight
because of this book.
What I hope, however, is that the factual information provided in the
book, much of it for the first time, will represent a point of departure
for future discussion.
There's a legitimate debate to be had about some aspects of Opus Dei's
internal culture and practice, and in my experience it's a conversation
happening, in the first place, inside Opus Dei itself.
The question of how Opus Dei could make itself more transparent without
compromising its own identity, for example, is a completely reasonable
point to press.
Opus Dei must increasingly realize that it is responsible not only to
itself and the memory of St. Josemaría Escrivá, but to the broader
Catholic Church, and hence should do anything in its power to respond to
legitimate questions and doubts.
At the same time, Opus Dei has also been a magnet for some of the
wildest accusations and speculation over the years, and I hope the book
will help to clear up those distractions so a more productive discussion
can move forward.
Q: Reading you, it appears that Opus Dei has not as much power or
influence as it seems. Why then this controversy and mysterious aura
around them?
Allen: To me, this is the greatest single question about Opus Dei: How
did this relatively small group, with only modest wealth and influence,
become the bogeyman of the Catholic imagination? I think the answer is
complex, pivoting on at least four factors:
One, Opus Dei grew up in Franco-era Spain, and hence has long been
linked to Spanish fascism.
Two, Opus Dei and the Jesuits engaged in fierce "border wars" over young
vocations in Spain in the 1930s and 1940s, generating a rivalry which
followed Opus Dei wherever it went because of the Jesuits' extensive
worldwide network.
Three, in the post-Vatican II era, Opus Dei became a symbol of the
broader struggles within Catholicism between left and right.
Four, in the John Paul II era, Opus Dei received considerable papal
favor, generating envy in some quarters and ideological opposition in
others. In other words, Opus Dei represents a sort of "perfect storm,"
where a combination of historical and political factors collided to
invest this group with a mythic status that its actual sociological
profile doesn't support.
Q: If I were from Opus Dei I would surely thank you for your book. Have
you received lots of messages in these terms?
Allen: I've heard from a number of Opus Dei members who are grateful for
what they see as the relatively balanced treatment they believe the
group received in the book.
Others, however, are unhappy with what they see as excessive focus on
the controversies surrounding Opus Dei. They feel as if Opus Dei is
their family, and it's always painful to hear accusations against loved
ones, even if they're given the most balanced treatment in the world.
I would say, by the way, I've received much the same reaction from Opus
Dei critics. Some feel the book gave fair voice to their concerns, while
others, convinced that Opus Dei is dangerous, feel as if I didn't go
nearly far enough in "exposing" its flaws.
This reaction illustrates the unfortunately polarized nature of much
discussion about Opus Dei.
Q: You think you do not fit into the Opus Dei structure. Do you realize
it now, after your research, or you already knew it?
Allen: As a journalist, I don't join groups within the Church as a
matter of general principle, because I need to preserve my impartiality.
For that reason, there was never any serious question of my joining Opus
Dei, or any other body. Certainly my 300-plus hours of interviews and
travels to eight countries for this book, however, brought home for me
that if I were to join a Catholic group, it would not be Opus Dei.
This is not the result of any lack of respect, or any fears about Opus
Dei; quite the contrary, I came to admire most of the people I met in
Opus Dei, and I usually found their company highly stimulating and
enjoyable.
Yet there is a daily "program of life" for Opus Dei members, and a set
of expectations about attendance at events and so on, that I would
personally find stifling.
I'm a classic "only child," meaning that control over my time and space
is important to me. I don't like anyone setting schedules for me, or
telling me when I need to pray, or how.
Let me be clear, however, that this is a matter of personal taste. I
admire the commitment I see in most Opus Dei members, and my perception
is that most are eminently satisfied with their experiences.