| |
|
Author
|
The ghost of opus |
Invitado
|
44 tracks
initiated
377 messages
posted
veteran |
| |
|
Published
21 October de 2002 at 16:03:49 
|
Service 127/02 (Aceprensa)
The Phantom of the Work
With the canonization of Josemaría Escrivá on October 6, arguably a "miracle" of the saint has been to transform the public image of Opus Dei, within and outside the Church. Since the controversy surrounding his beatification in 1992 has gone to a more sober, informed and in many cases, open sympathy. This change in perceptions of Opus Dei is also seen in Italy, according to the article by journalist Rodolfo Brancoli Phantom of the Opera, published in the liberal political magazine (June-July 2002) of center-left, which offer a summary.
Rodolfo Brancoli
2/10/2002.-
As outward signs of this change Brancoli mentions a "full and fair" interview with the prelate of Opus Dei, Bishop Javier Echevarria, published last January in La Repubblica newspaper that is part of a publishing group that has criticized the Opus Dei other occasions. "It's the most eye-catching sign of a substantial change in the way of perceiving the Opus Dei has recently manifested itself in the political establishment, Italian business and cultural and is reflected in the organs of information directly or indirectly influenced by them. The time that has materialized this change has been the international congress held in Rome at the beginning of the year, the centenary of the birth of the founder, who has had unprecedented media coverage, beyond the limited scope of the Catholic press, and that has benefited from the presence at the opening session of exponents forefront of Italian political world in all sectors.
It has moved on
Brancoli detects that "suddenly seems to be 'in' between the politician, businessman, publisher, who until recently sailed by other banks-appear associated in any way publicly to Opus Dei. In this there is an obvious risk of trivializing the message of Escriva, a risk that men and women of the Work (four thousand in Italy) I think they are fully aware, beyond the understandable satisfaction that this entails for those who have had to move for decades between distrust, hostility, innuendo, aggressive campaigns aimed at penalizing and in some cases to criminalize the work. How to understand the revolutionary character of Escriva's message, preventing it from being suffocated by polite applause, is a problem to them, "says Brancoli.
But "we must place on record that has moved on, and after half a century of presence in Italy has been reconstructed image, the very idea of Opus Dei. I'm talking about rebuilding it for a few decades it seemed that there were two Opus Dei: the one who had had the chance to meet him personally contacting members, and another who had only heard about it through media almost always in a context of demonization fabulesca (a secret society, Freemasonry Catholicism, political lobbying, financial, power group ...), leading to rumors that were far light years from reality known by direct experience.
"The fact that Opus Dei, since its founding in Spain (and, therefore up to us, from his landing in Italy in 1946) to the beatification of its founder in 1992, has suffered constant attacks, has been tenacious dislikes of silent hostility, sometimes in real campaigns, and even in Italy, the subject of a parliamentary initiative in the mid eighties that sought to put it out of play as a kind of secret lodge.
Reasons for the misunderstandings
Brancoli then explains some reasons for these misunderstandings. One of them is "the originality of Opus Dei, its character of novelty in the Church, with its proposal for an 'instrument of sanctification' in ordinary life, in his own work, in marriage, if this is the very vocation. " This full revaluation of the laity was an anticipatory intuition of the theology of the laity that is a feature of the post-conciliar Church. "As anticipated that resulted in some sectors of the church a lasting misunderstanding, which resulted in an attitude of open hostility (with some Jesuits in first row). As stated in advance that its founder to the charge of being crazy, and even of being a heretic. Not forgetting either, pointing Brancoli, misunderstandings caused by jealousy, to defend the exclusivity of the protected territories for some time.
This difficulty of understanding the uniqueness of Opus Dei, Brancoli adds, "increases when an experience he wants to be exclusively religious criteria are applied to religious considerations which have nothing". "That misunderstanding in the Church, we transformed into other environments where prejudice and ostracism, which became more virulent in the sense of vulnerability of Opus Dei that the first generated. Thus was born and spread the legend of the hidden power group in which the discretion of the membership, the professional excellence of some members, personal choices at the time of others, became undeniable evidence of a purpose only field the creation of a group of hidden power.
Who bothers
"The reality is that Opus Dei has deeply troubled some powers consolidated. For a newcomer to the civil society, which is directed with its ability to attract professional talents and to be present with its message of excellence in some influential knots, not a little annoying to those who want to control it, whether secular or clerical environments, longstanding field have found a modus vivendi with a substantial division of spheres of influence. Seldom has captured, for example, to what extent the spirit and style of the Opus Dei clergy have nothing. There are very net claims Escrivá against the very idea of a single party of the Catholics against the 'Catholic solutions', against clericalization of the areas of civil society against triumphalism, against the interference of clerics with the claim of being guides in the areas of lay believers themselves and, of course, against the claim to direct the vote. "
"Consistently, throughout the history of Opus Dei has never been a collective statement in favor or against certain policy. For the simple reason that it has no or can have it. And in the case of Italy, it is indisputable that all Catholic organizations operating here is probably the most they have been excluded from the Christian Democrats.
The poor and the bankers
Brancoli warns here that Opus Dei has taken exception to some sectors of Italian Catholicism, "whether he still amateur at traditional organizational forms and the occupation of separate spaces (Catholic doctors, employers either that Catholics ...); hiperpolitizado (in the civilian sphere, but also inclined to a politicization of the faith and the vision of a politicized role of the Church) and with an ethos pauperism, welfare, class, Third. Unable to understand that the recipient of the message of redemption, and sanctification, is not only the peasants of the Andes, but the Wall Street banker ( 'a hundred souls we are interested hundred', Escrivá said) and that an action intended to personal training such as that of the Opus Dei can not neglect any group at the same time, to be effective, must go to homogeneous groups in a style appropriate to his condition, without demagoguery or egalitarianism.
"In this field there has been a confluence objective against Opus Dei, including the Catholic world that not forgive him for not privileged to the poor in his ministry and to go in the first instance to professional environments, and that part of the secular world to which it seems wonderful that the Church is dedicated to the poor and less well also engaged bankers.
With the Council and John Paul II
In Italy, says Brancoli, Opus Dei has had a strong dislike of militant Catholicism sectors on an institution that, in the great exodus after the Council, has remained firmly loyal to papal teaching. Hence came against Opus Dei anticonciliar guidance prosecution, a charge that looks paradoxical because the conciliar texts are a tremendous endorsement by the doctrine that Escrivá was taught since 1928. Not only that, as the Opus Dei there is finally a legal solution that will give you a solid anchor in the hierarchical structure of the Church through the formula of 'Personal Prelature'. Therefore, the work owes much to the council and is well aware of that. "
"By firmly anchored in the teaching of the Pope, the work is identified with John Paul II, which established an undeniable affinity. So no wonder that those not attuned to the Pope, not in tune with the Work nor (...) The members of Opus Dei are thus becoming the 'praetorian Pope' for a publicist hostile to both. "
"For his strong identification with Pope John Paul II, Opus Dei benefits from the strengthening of the size and the consideration of this pope, also in the more distant".
"It also benefits from more direct knowledge, because every year tens of thousands of people come in contact with the work centers in 23 Italian cities. Direct knowledge can also verify that after all is not true that a power center, which does not practice an occupation of space, there is no 'roped' professionals together with other mixed. Power, not only politically, has noted this, and Italian-information for many years has preferred not to understand, through laziness or militancy clinging to a negative image-crystallized has followed his wheel. To give the impression that Opus Dei is now fashionable”.
|
|
| cazuelo |
4 tracks
initiated
64 messages
posted
veteran |
| |
|
Published
25 October de 2002 at 21:24:58 
|
Evaristo, look ...
Not wanting to offend, eh, but to you I find you very arrogant. Not to go too far, you remind me of me at age 16 when, with 4 arguments and 6 phrases that managers told me he believed he could convince anyone. Do you honestly it is necessary to put all these definitions or use the comparison (rather cloying, so repeating) of the windmills and giants. Back to where you used: round ten words that sound good and seem incontestable principle and this is already resolved everything. Well, I'm afraid not, mate. I hope so. And by the way (and I repeat, do not take it wrong) the great danger of always being right (or so they think) is the conceit. First Deadly Sin (with another name). Hugs. cazuelo  |
|
| Evaristo |
7 tracks
initiated
149 messages
posted
veteran |
| |
|
Published
25 October de 2002 at 23:48:30
|
Cazuelo:
Sorry for the flippancy. I spent perhaps ironic in the response, but does not seem right that there be no attempt to understand my position and my experience. Everyone on this forum, unless some mindless, we understood and respected the experiences of others (I mean the Tanit). Is it less mine? Is it less than what I experienced and saw live, and today, even from afar, I still see?
Not intend to convince anyone or use 4 arguments or 6 phrases, nor the example of the mills is mine, and it is neither mawkish nor repetitive (you could argue this but it is subject of this forum). And my worst sin is not conceit.
Anyway, sorry if I upset.
|
|
| Ulises |
4 tracks
initiated
106 messages
posted
veteran |
| |
|
Published
28 October de 2002 at 09:16:23
|
Evaristo, the first thing I remember is it was you who said it was my false statement that your main argument was "to hell" as it became clear that I was right, if you mean you've now changed my mind, is another matter, say it clearly but man!.
Concise and clear that they are not synonymous is so obvious that, how do you out of your mistake?, But I will tell you.
Be succinct in conversation is to be dry, strict, unadorned, straight and without unnecessary words.
Being clear is expressed clearly, be understood.
(I hope you can understand that you can be brief and not clear, or vice versa)
If these concepts as simple not get clear distinction, "one can think of other statements you make and we can not cotrastar?.
But the reason I give you something, this forum was not created to be discussed SIMPLEC how are you, so be clarified, we discussed, I will not go into another like it. I guess your childish attitude you will need to be the last to say something to feel that you stay above the typical "I one else but you" but think of me not to start another discussion of this type.
|
|
| Lola2002 |
12 tracks
initiated
179 messages
posted
veteran |
|
|
Published
28 October de 2002 at 12:58:54
|
Hey, guys ... Stop a bit with their discussions of language, which go beyond subject and bored ...
Sorry, no offense, but a little dense with that ...
Un beso! 
Lola
icq: 172943141
|
|
| volo |
0 tracks
initiated
38 messages
posted
common |
| |
|
Published
28 October de 2002 at 19:52:24
|
Dear Marc, I commented in a previous message, almost a title of story, what happened to me with a stock of several corporations, and you show your amazement and ask me for clarification. Another topic of discussion (I think the drug) you say you are temporary and you have a brother and sister Fellows. So I think that will give you more credibility your answer, so ask them: 1 .- Who is the legal owner of the facility where they live?. If as I suppose, I respond that a corporation with educational purposes (or something), ask 2 .- Who are the shareholders of that company? Where are bought and sold those shares?. This way you will have the information firsthand.
If I may, and even get into what I do not mind your head You know that these sailing and intervening in this forum? "You tell the things you read in the talk here fraternal? Evil spirit would not. Of course not pretend to answer these questions, but thinking about them.
Regards. |
|
| Evaristo |
7 tracks
initiated
149 messages
posted
veteran |
| |
|
Published
28 October de 2002 at 20:00:31
|
See Ulysses: the child truly is the position of throwing the stone and hide the hand. You can not expect that in a forum (whatever) do not meet the aforementioned. I think the forums were invented for that. Not good resource to get the band before the injury. It is not about ego than you, or you more than me. If you want to be right, all yours. I only have my experience.
I will not follow the semantic argument (the issue is trust the DRAE or you) and I already apologized for the tone.
But please, stop saying that my main argument is "with balls", which let you look ridiculous, that people will think that they distinguish themselves logical arguments of free will. And if you confuse it, what do you think of other statements you make and we can not compare?
Greetings
|
|
|
There are 4
pages of post: 
Close this topic
moderated forum