Thank you for an eloquent testimony to the simplicity, the utterly traditional Catholicism of Opus Dei. Thank you also for shining the light of truth on the incomprehensibe idiocy of our modern era.
Professor Blosser thank you for this excellent summary of the nature of Opus Dei.
Chris, it was 'the simplicity, the utterly traditional Catholicism of Opus Dei' which drew me to the Work.
Phil,
First, the Whole Truth: I'm a supernumerary of Opus Dei.
Bracketing that fact as best I can, and attempting a "naive" point of view, this was one of the weirdest magazine articles I have ever read. Disjointed and erratic, one paragraph attempting a touch of the lurid, the next inocuous, friendly-sounding and containing a great quote. Completely bewildering for anyone who is unable to parse this sort of journalistic confusion.
I agree with you wholeheartedly about the McDonaldization of American sentiment. I do take a slightly more benigh view of TIME's editors and writers in this case. You find spin in some of the juxtapositions: they don't strike me in quite that way. Spin the article had (esp. in a couple of the quotes from third parties), but less than I expected. It seemed to me that TIME really did not know what to do with the data. I think they had some of the same wide-eyed cluelessness that many of their readers are going to have. "Look at this whip and at this nice-looking priest." (And a very nice photo it was---not sidelit, with half the face in light and half in darkness). "These two somehow go together. We don't understand it any better than you do." McDonaldized-sentimental outlook, definitely. But also the bewilderment that comes from a complete lack of familiarity with all relevant categories of understanding.
One should also remind oneself that TIME is, more or less, the McDonalds of journalism (with plenty of company).
Last year's New Yorker article "A Hard Faith" would be helpful to unlucky readers of this TIME piece, and, one would hope, a harbinger of better things to come higher in the journalistic food chain. Not that I'm exactly holding my breath...
Witherington is treating the Da Vinci movie as a teaching moment for the church (a bit like harried teachers giving interdisciplinary seminars on The Name of the Rose 20 years ago or The Lord of the Rings 35 years ago). But it is also a moment for PROPHETIC DENUNCIATION of a meretricious culture and BUDDHIST ANALYSIS of the forces of delusion that have got us where we are. TV produces that feed to children what the children immediately want are as criminal and irresponsible as people who would feed children chocolates all day. And worse is a culture that infantilizes adults -- preparing them as material for the next round of fascism.
What I have always found particularly puzzling is popular culture's idolization of atheletes and entertainers who abuse their bodies (and their spirits) far more than any Opus Dei member ever could in pursuit of an ephemeral popularity or a material payoff. Listen to the voice over or commentary to an "Iron Man Triathalon" sometime, which frequently goes into graphic detail of the physical tortures involved in preparing for and participating in such a contest.
Need we mention sex? Otherwise ordinary people will engage in extremely dangerous and physically debilitating practices to "enhance" their "performance" (as if there were an audience in the bedroom applauding their efforts at aborted procreation).
What about "the choking game," in which children semi-strangle each other just for kicks?
Even businessmen are not exempt, practicing what would otherwise be heroic virtue in pursuit of wealth, foregoing normal family and personal relations and abusing their bodies with lack of sleep and improper eating and exercise habits.
Perhaps the Time article was not so much confused over the fact that people would do such things, but that they would do them with an actual, meaningful goal in mind, a goal that did not result in instant gratification, but seems to contradict the usual wisdom of the world.
Thanks for the great article. All my experience with Opus Dei has always been to my great spiritual benefit - the friendship with numeraries, the spiritual direction, the fine devotional and religious books published by presses associated with them.
The attenuation of Catholic practice and piety is startling. I was Russian Orthodox for many years before I was received into the Roman Catholic Church. This Lent I reverted to prior practices and ate no meat. My fellow Catholics were stunned - and even more stunned to learn that Catholics had done just this not that many years ago.
Not only is there attenuation - there's amnesia.
If you really want to look like a freak, give up television for Lent. You can "hide" liquor by drinking tonic with a twist, but there's no way out of,
"Did you see [show] last night?"
"No."
"What are you, some kind of nut?"
"Yes."
Good article. Dr. Blosser: Are you a part of Opus Dei? You make some excellent points, and I think a lot of the causes seem to stem from lack of good catechesis, and also a lack of appreciation of what the Saints and martyrs have done for us.
Please correct me if I somehow misread Fr. O'Leary, but it appears that he and I completely agree on the topic of the "chocolates all day" approach to raising children. Break out the champaigne. Chalk one up for ecumenism?
There are two culture wars at the moment -- one is the Liberal vs Conservative. But both flanks of this war can join together for a more important culture war -- the war to save culture itself! Dehumanizing cynical materialism is the number one enemy of children now growing up, who are being indoctrinated into liking and needing the cheapest trash, and thus into thinking in immoral and violent ways.
Thank you!
In Weigel's "Witness to Hope" he mentions how Pope Paul VI actually wore a cilice under his tunic during Lent.
Probably because I was raised in an Opus Dei environment (although not an actual member myself) where small mortification (non-phisical) is a given from early childhood, I have always been surprised at all the hype about this issue when it becomes "public". Not least because as later in my life I learned, this was also a given for previous generations in my family that had nothing to do with Opus Dei, and a lot with the jesuit spirituality. It is just a catholic thing to do.
Great article. Thanks.
**This Lent I reverted to prior practices and ate no meat. My fellow Catholics were stunned - and even more stunned to learn that Catholics had done just this not that many years ago.**
Mary Jane,
My family also goes without meat for Lent and I wonder if you could tell me, please, whether in the Russian Orthodox communion meat is eaten on the Sundays of Lent. I get mixed answers on this, some saying that Sunday is never a fast day (okay, but going without meat is abstinence, not fasting) and others saying that the traditional Lenten fast and abstinence extended to the entire forty days.
This was a very fine commentary, Dr. Blosser. I share this personal experience (especially because anonymous) in hopes it will be helpful and encouraging.
Our family has ratcheted up our Lenten observances over the years. We started with the canonical meatless Fridays and then added one additional day per year until the whole of Lent is now meatless. Also no sweets (a great sacrifice for the children) except on St. Joseph's day and a little something on Laetare Sunday. The parents add some additional penances and abstinences beyond what the children do.
The beauty of these fasts and abstinences is that Easter really does become particularly poignant and sweet. It is truly a great feast and relief from the relative deprivation of our bodies for the past forty days amplifies the joy of that day. Our children yearn for Easter and, although there is a carnal element to that, I believe that the other contrasts--the Gloria chanted once again at Mass, joyful rather than somber hymns, white rather than purple vestments, etc.--really does help the message of Easter enter into their hearts more readily. I strongly encourage parents to guide themselves and their children toward a much more traditional (i.e. austere) Lent. Good for what ails us.
Now to turn Advent into the penitential season that it once was, to highten the joy of Christmas.......
Opus Dei is not for me.
I have a good friend who is a supernumerary, and there was a time when I was very close to the group. I'm basically supportive, and I find the treatment of Opus Dei in The Da Vinci Code to be scandalous. Yet I have a perception that Opus Dei promotes a certain "cult of perfectionism", which I find hard to accept. (Please note that I am using the word "cult" here in its deeper etymological sense. I'm not calling Opus Dei a "cult" in the pejorative sense.) I am bothered by this "cult of perfectionism", which I see extending beyond the boundaries of Opus Dei itself. It is HARD to be a good Catholic. We need to do a better job of bearing one another's burdens. IMHO, Opus Dei does not do such a great job on that front.
My two cents ...
I hope that my traditionalist friends on this blog will pause before launching a reply to my comment above. I truly admire 'the simplicity, the utterly traditional Catholicism' of Opus Dei.
I should also note that my supernumerary friend is a big fan of the Novus Ordo, and isn't very sympathetic toward those who seek a restoration of the Latin Mass. I've actually played the "traditionalist" in our discussions concerning this issue!
There is certainly more diversity in Opus Dei than Dan Brown has ever bothered to consider.
Hey Dave,
I'm with you on the diversity in Opus Dei 100%. I am a supernumerary and it is always a delight to me when I get together on my workshop with other people in the Work and discover the amazing range of interests and opinions and histories they have. There is no cookie cutter member of the Work.
As far as the perfectionism thing goes-- I guess I've just never encountered that. We are constantly encouraged to keep striving for holiness, but it is exactly the striving-- the struggling-- which is the key. If the goal was really perfectionism, I would have been (politely) shown the door years ago. 
Oh, and Professor Blosser, I actually jumped into the comment box initially to tell you that your essay rocks. Thank you so much for taking the time to write it. I don't remember how I wandered into your blog, but I think you've gained yourself another reader..
**I should also note that my supernumerary friend is a big fan of the Novus Ordo, and isn't very sympathetic toward those who seek a restoration of the Latin Mass. I've actually played the "traditionalist" in our discussions concerning this issue!**
Which is very strange considering that St. Escriva, like St. Padre Pio, asked for a dispensation and thus never said the Novus Ordo. And I'm told that he considered the theology of the Offertory of the new Rite to be problematic and so early on instructed his priests to say the traditional Offertory sotto voce.
But, as you say, there is a certain diversity in Opus Dei.
Dr. Blosser, you really should submit that essay to the New Oxford Review. It would be right up their alley and it deserves a wider audience.
A personal anecdote, having to do with the Novus Ordo and the traditional Mass. I attended Mass at the old Sacred Heart Church in Atlanta while visiting the city on business this week. It is a very traditional-looking Church building. You can still see the old altar in the back of the sanctuary. The new altar has Deus Caritas Est inscribed on the front, which must date from earlier than the pope's encylical letter!
There was a small, committed core attending the noon Mass. It was a very diverse group of many ages and races, including a wild looking young (early 30-ish?) man with Bob Marley dreadlocks sitting at the very front. A traditional crucifix (bloody, which doesn't bother me!) and a large mosaic of the Sacred Heart of Jesus dominated the sanctuary and dome.
It was, of course, a Novus Ordo Mass, with most everyone receiving Communion in the hand -- to the extent that I lifted my eyes to observe. (I received our Lord upon my tongue, as has been my practice since the debate on this blog several weeks ago.) The whole atmosphere was very devout. The Chaplet of the Divine Mercy was recited after the Mass. Yet there was something about seeing that poor neglected altar at the back of the sanctuary ...
Thomist, AFAIK, St. Josemaria actually did start saying the New Mass when it became normative to do so. He did, however, struggle mightily with it, largely because it was quite different than what he'd been doing for well over forty years. When Don Alvaro del Portillo, his "right-hand-man" so to speak, mentioned it in passing to whatever Vatican official was in charge of such things, said official dispensed St. Josemaria on the spot, with no requesting done on anybody's part.
Also, I'd be curious to see any documentation you can offer regarding his view of the NO as "problematic."
I didn't grow up with the "Novus Ordo" or with the "Traditional Latin Mass". I'm a convert. Although I am required to assist at the Mass according to the rite of Paul VI, and I consider it wholly valid, our family Mass is the Missal of Pius V. The utter banality of the translation makes it difficult for me, even at a reverently celebrated Mass, to be receptive to the graces available. I was struck by this recently when I assisted at a Mass in English at my home parish after almost a month away from it.
Afaik, Margaret is right that St. Josemaria declined to ask for a dispensation. But when a dispensation was obtained by others for him (or even, in another version I've heard, an order that he use the old rite), he was of course delighted.
Opus Dei priests say the N.O. with the reverence and rubrical precision that the Church asks for but almost never gets. The Masses we attend on our workshops and retreats are the most beautiful I ever see and hear.
I'm a bit unusual in that my family and I attend a standard N.O. parish on Sundays, and are registered there, but I have lately been going to a Tridentine daily Mass, because this has recently become possible in my area, and because it's my thing. But, as Margaret pointed out, you'll get different views from different members of Opus Dei.
The Work imposes no liturgical rules beyond, or other than, those that the Church imposes. So if it's permitted but not required that Catholics attend the Tridentine Mass, then it's permitted but not required that Opus Dei members do so. Since it's prohibited to Catholics to reject the validity of the N.O., it's prohibited to Opus Dei members to do so. Sounds cool to me.
Christ is risen!
I'll try to answer Thomistwannabe's question about the Orthodox fasting praxis in Lent.
In the Byzantine (both Orthodox and Catholic) Churches, we do not use the Western distinction between 'fasting' and 'abstinence' - our fast is concerned primarily with the quality, not quantity consumed.
Traditional Byzantine fasting forbids meat, fish, eggs, dairy, wine and oil. The mitigation on weekends during fasting periods means that wine and oil are permitted then. Fish is permitted on Annunciation and Palm Sunday; Oil and Wine are permitted on Great Thursday, Wine is permitted on Great Saturday. On top of this, the fasting Typicon (rules) prescribe an austere 'maximum' fast, in which only one meal a day is eaten, after Vespers, and the food must be cold and uncooked. Also, in theory there is no meal at all in the three days from Forgiveness Sunday Vespers (when we start Great Lent) till Wednesday of the First Week (when the first communion of Lent is received). It is not uncommon for Byzantines to observe this custom, as well as the same custom on the first three days of Great Week, and from dinner on Great Thursday till the post-Paschal Liturgy Feast early on Easter morning.
On the other hand, Latinised and Modernised Byzantines, particularly in North America, seem to ignore this and follow Latin fasting practices - a great source of scandal to those of us who treasure our Traditions.
GOD IS GERMAN:
Am Anfang war das Wort.
Commenting by HaloScan
