Conciliar Religion’s Pederast Saint

What do you get when you mix a sanitized biography, phony history and avaricious personality cult with a counterfeit religion?  Answer: a tangled mess of disorientation from which only a divine institution could ever recover. In this site’s previous post on Opus Dei (here), the question was raised, based on Opus Judei and other sources, as to whether the Personal Prelature of Opus Dei and the Holy Cross is a wholly un-Catholic, and indeed a crypto-Judaic fifth column wielding enormous destructive power and influence over the visible Church.  Moving ahead into Opus Judei, this post examines a certain aspect of the life of Opus Dei’s founder, as well as the orchestrated management of information by a sort of tactical disclosure.

What is a Limited Hangout?

Sounds a bit like a privilege allowing a person to socialize with the cool kids on some sort of informal yet probationary basis, but that’s not it.  “A limited hangout is the deliberate revelation of some information (e.g. about malfeasance) to try to confuse and/or prevent discovery of other information. A modified limited hangout goes further, by slightly changing the information disclosed.”  Apparently coined during the Nixon administration amid attempts to contain the damage caused by the Watergate scandal, and to contain further damage caused by the attempt to cover it up; Nixon’s confidantes suggested the tactical release of certain, sensationalized information that would sufficiently absorb the attention of the press and the public, so as to both distract the press from inquiring further, and to satisfy the public’s curiosity. It didn’t work for Nixon; and if the men behind the veil of Opus Dei are attempting just such a disclosure with one hand while concealing with the other, may that effort be just as unsuccessful.

Let’s examine the English version of the text Opus Judei in this regard.  The Spanish version of the book is 246 pages long. The only English version which I could find online  is a mere fifty-three pages, and even admits to being a publication of extracts of the Spanish edition.

Opus Judei English contents 1
English version of Opus Judei

The English publisher translates the Spanish prologue, select portions of Chapter One, Chapter II (subheading i. only) and Chapter III (subheadings only), followed by footnotes and endnotes. The book’s translated first chapter, for some odd reason, omits the translation of subheadings xii and xiv, which bear the following titles: xii-Totalitarianism & Fanaticism and xiv-Judas in Action. Why were these two subheadings de-selected from the translation into English?  Why does what appears to be the only English version of Opus Judei leave more than two-thirds of the book in its original Spanish? Why is knowledge of Opus Dei’s true nature, scope and breadth sequestered from English speaking Catholics?

Opus Judei English contents 2
– omits 2/3 of the Spanish original.

The translated text covers ground that will already be quite familiar to anyone who has visited the website of the Opus Dei Awareness Network, or read any of the authors listed there. Topics covered include consideration of Opus Dei as a cult, psychological tactics used for recruitment and retention, treatment programs undertaken by those who have left the cult, and that Opus Dei is greedy for money and niggardly with charity. The silhouette of a limited hangout comes into view, in which the reader can digest the pulpy bits of fact regarding the Prelature’s secretive, stingy and inhumane modes of operation. But this same silhouette is much more easily perceived when we pull back the curtain and look at the information that doesn’t seem to appear in English anywhere. Are we dealing with a limited hangout in the case of the English translation of a mere 30% of the Spanish text Opus Judei?

Opus Judei’s Section five of Chapter II provides numerous references to Escriva de Balaguer’s decidedly unnatural proclivities, in the words of people who saw and knew. The following are some noteworthy passages from the book by pseudonymous Colombian author Escriba, whose nom de plume seems to make reference to the Founder’s Judaic surname, as it originally was. The conciliar religion’s saint of over fifteen years turns out to have been a homosexual pederast, something which would have been uncovered right away had it not been for Saint John Paul the Great’s elimination of the office tasked with investigating the facts behind causes for canonization, known as Devil’s Advocate. Read for yourself from Opus Judei Chapter II, Subsection v, pp. 94-105, titled Nefarious Trends, translated via

Colombian author Escriba includes citations to the following authors and works in Opus Judei, II ii.:

Dominique Le Tourneau    El Opus Dei
Michael Walsh                      The Secret World of Opus Dei
Daniel Artigues                    The Opus Dei in Spain
Luis Carandell                      Life and Miracles of Monsignor Escriva de Balaguer
Yvon Le Vaillant                  La Santa Mafia
Alberto Moncada                Oral History of Opus Dei

Escriva kept an open secret. What everyone thought, which many have insinuated without daring to say in public. Escriva had an obsession, a proclivity, a bad seed related to his sexual behaviors. He was a delicate and faint-hearted homosexual.

Already since his youth he felt the perverse carnal inclination. At Logrono, in the seminary, he had, as we have already mentioned, problems stemming from his condition. In Zaragoza, in his adolescence, he attracted attention because “he never went out with girls. His elegant ways, that slender look of his person, the pleasing appearance in the manner, didn’t attract girls. When Antonio or some other friend made comments to him in that sense, he cut them off, exclaiming something like: “If they knew me well, inside, as I am…”. That tendency has followed him through his whole life. One year before his death, on June 23, 1974, he exclaimed loudly at the Teatro Coliseo in Buenos Aires: “Pray for all priests – sinners like me – so that we don’t do anything crazy. What madness was meant by that man of attractive appearance and a marked neatness, not to say elegance in dress, despite his financial hardships?” In the seminary in Zaragoza, his way of dressing distinguished him. Most seminarians, Vazquez notes, were somewhat vulgar and uneducated. Escriva de Balaguer was the exception. His clothes were always clean, his shoes always shiny. Apparently it was cause for comment that he washed himself from head to toe every day.” The official biographer describes Josemaria as “handsome, tall and stocky.”

“From the very beginning, some did not understand Josemaria’s bearing, talents and manners. When he was named superior of the seminary,” his biographer continues, “he had Jose Maria Roman Cuartero as his family, who always saw him as an example that every day washed himself from head to toe, something that others did not do. These and other details led this young man to believe that Josemaria would not become a priest, because he considered him with human possibilities for better careers…”
Logically, not everyone would judge things in this way.

Maria Angustias Moreno reveals a definitive testimonial document to us when she transcribes in her book the story of Felix Pons which cites, “unfortunately for me I met Opus, presented by the priest D. Saturnino de Dios… in 1934 was when I introduced myself to Escriva and began to look after the residence of Ferraz. He was just a vulgar, run-of-the-mill student. For lunch there was a boy named Laureano who had joined the Work, from the reformatory of Porta Coeli (young delinquents dependent on the Juvenile Court) where the Opus met until they had that residence in Ferraz. Laureano was the administrator of Porta Coeli and facilitated their meetings at that institution. At Ferraz he was in charge of shopping and ordering meals. He wasn’t bad at it. For the small space of the residence hall with a simple curtain in the middle of a room, in two bedsteads that during the day were divans to sit on, where we both slept.

Except for his vast education he was a good boy and nothing could be said of him. In daily communion he confessed to the Father. And one day, without knowing why, he left for Malaga and Ricardo went to say goodbye at the station. When Ricardo returned I saw that Father was asking for a meeting with a monastary in Malaga, where he had provided him with a placement, which were those who had taken leave of Porta Coeli, because if he left the Work he would be on the street. And to my astonishment, when he spoke to the superior of that monastary, Escriva said to him,  ‘that I had sent him under the pretext of getting rid of him, telling Laureano that they needed an errand boy for the monastary, but that they would neither take the placement, nor recommend it to anyone, because it was filled.’ Imagine how I looked. Everyone knew this, including Genaro Gumiel, to confirm it.”

From 1935 to 1935 there were only seven in Opus and all lived with their respective families, except Laureano – the homosexual already mentioned who was next to Escriva in the residence. The rest were Ricardo Fernandel Vallespin, Saiz de los Terreros, Isidoro Barredo, Jenaro Lazaro Gumiel and Jimenez. And as incipient or probable, my brother Bernardo and, after my brother and I, Esteban Portilo, Garnica, Fisac, Casciaro and two medical students, brothers whose surname was Fontana. Those were the ones who showed up at Ferraz.

Later on, the daily life of the numeraries of the Work would be very similar to the monastary and “there were so many prohibitions regarding going out, as not going to parties where there could be women, neither to cinemas, nor to theatres, that the young people of Opus suffered constant misinterpretations and criticisms of relatives and friends. Also, since the houses were small, the numeraries slept two by two in each room.”

His first twelve followers were: Angel Santos Ruiz, Rodriguez Casado, Ignacio Orbegozo, Alfanso Bacells, Juan Jimenez y Vargas, Federico Suarez Verdeguer, Miguel Fisac, Isidoro Zorzano, Alvaro del Portillo, Jose Luis Muzquiz, Jose Maria Hernandez Garnica and Pedro Casciaro. “Fisac’s defection in 1965 served to increase the myth, equating it to that of the Iscariot, handled in the case of White Masonry as a charism.”

The reason for Fisac’s abandonment was none other than that of marriage, for which reason he was excluded from the circle, which suggests that celibacy was already part of the obligations imposed by the founder.

It seems evident, writes Luis Carandell, that Escriva de Balaguer has cultivated since his youth a virtue of leadership that consists in resisting the urge to indulge himself, in wisely administering “the spiritual and even physical attraction that he seems to have.”

He does not fail to think of the phrase attributed to him and which he collects in his propagandistic book of the Work. Jean Jacques Thierry attributes it to Escriva, who states that he “does not divulge the details of the beginnings of the Work, since these principles are intimately linked to the history of my soul and belong to my inner life.”

Escriva wanted to overcome his strong inclination with pain and corporal punishment. At the Academy “there was naturally a bathroom. Despite the constant cleansing, its walls were stained with blood, from the floggings that Escriva inflicted on himself. He used a’ discipline’, a kind of nine-branch spanking to which he had tied pieces of metal and pieces of razor blades (it is not said if other residents joined, although this penitential practice became commonplace in Opus). The chain with spikes attached to Balaguer’s Writing arm were kept in the’ Father’s room’. There, under a representation of the evangelical history of miraculous fishing, confidential conversation was fostered and spiritual guidance was imparted.

The best psychological portrait referring to the homosexuality of the father Escriva de Balaguer has been painted by the writer Vicente Gracia in his historical work narrated in novel form entitled In the Name of the Father, published in 1980. Vincent Gracia knew Opus Dei well, had been a member and reflected his inner experience. He illustrates to us how Father “gently waved his hands” and how he eagerly asked, “when will the boys who are going to begin their theology course at the College arrive? I look forward to seeing them. Are they handsome?” and then “piously moisten his lips” and preparing for such an event in the familiar scene that played out many times,

“Father, the tailor is here to measure you.”

“Ah! The cassock!” It is meticulously observed in the tailor’s mirror… the skirts of the cassock open in a wavy flight that produces the fru-fru of delicate clothes. “I’m handsome, right, Alvaro?” When the students arrived in Rome, situations like these occurred, “-Hey, I’d like to see you… are you handsome? Don Alvaro’s got me kidnapped here in my quarters, you know? He doesn’t want me to see you until Saturday, but I can’t take it anymore because you won’t come to see me! What room are you in?”

Confused, the recruits would accept the strong embrace against Father’s chest and the kisses he gives on his forehead.  “Will you never tell anyone about this meeting, and it must always be a secret between you and me?” While he lets his hair be caressed by the hands of the Father who presses it against his chest and kisses it tenderly on his cheeks. The tone of the Father’s voice becomes increasingly intimate and emotional. Take Luis’ hands, reach up to his chest and whisper in his ear,

“Do you love me, son?”
“Yes, Father.”
“But how much do you love me?”
“-I don’t know, very much.”

Together the faces, with their breasts clothed, in a total spiritual bond – at once unconscious and pure – lit in the same frenetic flame of love for God, the two lovers seal their contract with a kiss on the cheeks that glides wetly on the skin. The Father’s eyes sparkle and a tremor of lips betrays his emotion.

It is not the only moral plasticity where Felix Gracia, who knew the Father, tells us about his ‘loving’ adventures. This next romance described for us takes place between Monsignor Escriva and a priest. “Monsignor Escriva takes him by the hand and leads him to the window, bringing him closer to the light. ‘What noble facial features! They were said to be sculpted on satin stone!’ Monsignor raises his hand and gently caresses the young priest’s jaw as if he fears breaking it, as if it were a beautiful crystal object. Monsignor Escriva continues to gently caress the smooth face of a ‘beloved son.’ Well, well… – the Father forgives him with moist eyes and lips – it doesn’t matter. ‘I forgive you if you give me anything else.’

‘Anything else? What does the Father want?’

‘Can’t you guess?’ The Father smiles, as if stung. And adds ‘- Now that no one sees us…’ Don Victor, troubled, turns his head in vain. ‘-I’d like you to give me a kiss.’

Monsignor cannot prevent the flush of desire from covering his cheeks. The young priest approaches the Father and, hugging him slightly, kisses him on the cheeks. Then, passionately, the Father returns the loving caress, moistening with his lips the soft and perfumed complexion of his son, almost touching the end of his lips.

This inner restlessness, this sexual uneasiness, is irremediably expressed in his written work and spiritual guide of Opus, the Way, from which we are going to select some of the maxims and slogans that refer, among the many that are found, to Escriva’s pederastal feelings.

“Marriage is for the troop and not the General Staff of Christ. While eating is an individual requirement, procreation is only a requirement for the species, from which individuals can escape. Thirst for fatherhood? … If we sacrifice the selfishness of the flesh we would leave behind children, many children and an ineffable trait of light.”

“It will be true, I do not believe it, I do not want to believe it, that on earth there are no men but surrogates?”

“The most refined dish, the most delicious at best, transforms the pork delicacy, if it is eaten by a pig, to say things as they are. Let’s be angels to transform food into vigorous and beautiful muscles, perhaps, into a powerful brain….”

“Don’t forget you’ re… the trash. That is why, if the divine gardener perhaps takes advantage of you and rubs and cleanses you… and fills you with magnificent flowers… neither the aroma nor the color that beautifies your ugliness should make you proud. Humble yourself. Don’t you know you’re the garbage can?”

“You talk to me about dying’ heroically’. Don’t you think it’s more’ heroic’ to die unnoticed in a good bed, like a bourgeoisie… and from love sickness?”

 “What is the secret of perseverance? Love. Fall in love and you won’t let him.”

“Your crucifix – as a Christian, you should always carry your crucifix with you, and put it on your desk. And when the poor body rebels against your soul, kiss it also.”

“Win the Guardian Angel from whomever you wish to bring your apostolate – it is always a great accomplice.”

“Adopt you? You from the monastary? Yes! You were made for the man in charge! There’s no room among us for the lukewarm. Humble yourself and Christ will rekindle you with a fire of love.”

He laughed. “Be manly. Be a man. And then… Be an angel.”

“We need a crusade of virility and purity to counteract and annul the savage labor of those who believe that man is a beast…”

“Don’t mind it if they say you have a bodily spirit.”

“Festivals and folk customs must be revived urgently… Ask the Lord that there be those who work in this urgent task, which we can call’ apostolate of fun’.”

“I will never have weighed the importance of discretion enough.”

“Gold, silver, jewels… earth, manure piles! Enjoyable, sensual pleasures, satisfying appetites… like a beast, like a mule, like a pig, like a rooster, like a bull.”

“Take away from me, Jesus, that hoarse crust of sensual rot that covers my heart, so that I may feel and hear the touch of the Paraclete in my soul.”

“Even though the meat is dressed in silk, meat it shall remain.”

“The plan of holiness that the Lord asks of us is determined by these three points: holy intransigence, holy coercion and holy shamelessness.”

“One thing is holy shamelessness and another is secular freshness.”

“If you have the holy shamelessness, what do you care what they say or what they will have said?”

Among the slogans launched by Escriva and that have become classic in the Work in relation to the Apollonian, is the one collected by Le Torneau who invokes, “liberate yourself from the ugliness of the soul and the body.” The founder of Opus considered that for a normally constituted person, “the subject of sex occupies a fourth or fifth place” and added “it is also customary to consider the struggle in points that are far from the capital walls of the fortress.”

In Christmas homily of 1970 he said, “Chastity – not simply continence, but a strong affirmation of a will in love – is a virtue that keeps the youth of love in any state of life.” Sometimes in the loneliness of his reflection he thought of you above all, “time passed, and hard things happened, tremendous things, which I do not tell you because I do not feel sorry for myself, but you would be saddened.”

The Marquis of Valdeiglesias {ed: the noble title for which Escriva strove and attained}, when speaking about Opus Dei, questioned himself, “Does he pursue purely outer-terrestrial or specifically human ends? Won’t it be, maybe, in the mix of the two that’s bad?”

During a trip through Latin American lands, his biography tells us about an anecdote that happened one day in 1974 in Brazil when “around thirteen years ago Rafael Llano met with him. The founder of Opus Dei responded to his greeting with the Italian melody Timida e la bocca tua’, which he used to gently sing to him in Rome a long time ago, alluding to the non small dimensions of the mouth of Rafael and his brothers, almost all members of the Work. In the afternoon Escriva would say, ‘I remember there were a lot of people once. I saw one of them and I said, ‘You’re a little tart.’ And he answered, ‘Yes, how do you know me? In the mouth, remember?’”

Braulia, the little sister of Maria Ignacia Garcia Escobar, contemplates the Founder of the Work in 1931 “always surrounded by young boys. Father liked to repeat, ‘I have spoken of my twenty-five years. I had barracks of what the Lord wanted. I didn’t know until I was 26. I wanted this madness, this madness of affection, of union, of love…’ His passion was famous among his close ones.”Among Escriva’s most secret intimacies is his very special affection for Isidoro Zorzano to whom he professed a deep love in every sense. Isidoro Zorzano had been his companion at the Instituto de Logrono in his adolescence. The sympathy was mutual and reciprocal. When Escriva travels to Zaragoza, he stopped consorting with him, although he maintains some epistolary contact. “I wanted to make him the newborn Opus.” And on August 24, 1930, he found contact in Madrid. Isidoro worked in Malaga as a railroad engineer, he had come to speak with Escriva about his spiritual concerns… Zorzano was so close to Escriva that “for some time he was actively promoted as a candidate for canonization, although his cause has been quietly abandoned, although there is practically no one in Spain who knows anything about Isidoro Zorzano”.

The succinct biography of this single boy Isidoro Zorzano comes to us through Florentino Perez Embid, who illustrates to us that he was from an Argentinean family – he was born in Buenos Aires on September 13, 1902 – that “he had to be one of Father’s first disciples when he founded his Work and that he had to share his adolescent aspirations.” For a time he was director of the Ferraz Residence Hall, remaining throughout the Spanish war in Madrid as an engineer at the RENFE headquarters, dying in 1943 of the so-called Hodgkins disease. Escriva hastened to open the process for his beatification shortly after his death, although time soon made him forget love. “Did that man ever do anything important in his life?” The young man died, without time to carry out any especially remarkable task… he was above all a companion of Escriva.

The epilogue of his life is written by Fisac, who tells us that “when Isidoro Zorzano had to be hospitalized due to a painful lymph node disease, I went every Sunday to keep him company and it was gratifying for me to be able to talk with him about my desire to leave the Work, about the discomfort caused by the scruples of my sexual problems, which he understood; When Isidoro died, Father Escriva reacted in a very strange way, like with fear, and let Eduardo Alastrue and you stranger, and I shroud him without intervening at all.” Here we will highlight Escriva’s necrophobia, which never attends funerals, neither prays for the deceased, possibly because a dead member is one who fails to attract his attention and affection.

Such was his degree of obsession that “Escriva came to write that the executive numeraries should not have women secretaries, but secretaries who are men,” for a great subject of the life of those numeraries is constituted by the vow of chastity in its double aspect of sexual and affective repression… Few matters have deserved such a lot of notes and warnings from Rome. From the formulas so that members of the male and female sections are not treated, with the double lock in the buildings and the internal telephone for conversation that should “meet the needs of the administration,” even casuistry on how not to be alone in a room with people of another sex, or eat with them, let alone walk or travel with them. Escriva’s hypothesis was to try to deny the existence of the other sex.

When Escriva moved to Rome in 1946, he found in Alvara del Portillo – today’s successor {as of the mid 1990s}, Prelate of Opus Dei and Bishop – “a collaborator and an accomplice at all times, strong and flexible … his relationship with Escriva was very close. You can even say that Alvaro del Portillo walks on Escriva’s footprints.”

As Escriva liked to emphasize, “Well, yes! We love each other! Yes, sir. We love each other and it’s the best compliment you can tell us!” Or in a more chaste way when he insisted that “man’s sins are summed up in one hand. The palm that goes from the pocket to the fly.”

It is famous, for example, that the admission of notoriously ugly people is frowned upon in the Institute and that the oratories and churches of Opus Dei never lack pictorial and sculptural representations of angels and archangels, young beauties that appear triumphant giving death with their sword to sweaty and carnal men in whose eyes shines the fire of lust. Eros, lascivious, seductive.

Could the narratives related above help explain the paralyzing silence of the Catholic hierarchy, and the galling arrogance of known criminals like Daneels, Karadima, Mahony and so many others? Does the power of Opus Dei contribute to the power of the homosexual collective, to the power to silence under pervasive threat of blackmail?

Opus Dei Watch: What Stance On Opus Dei?

Over the course of the past year or so, eminent Catholic author and researcher Randy Engel (The Rite of Sodomy)  has inquired and asked relevant, fact based questions about Opus Dei, its organizational structure, financial dealings, and membership/affiliation questions as they relate to certain prominent Catholic writers and reporters. Additionally, she has uncovered direct evidence of activities that require Diocesan permission, such as Opus Dei’s offering of catechesis to NYC Catholics at significant price, and done without the ADNY’s knowledge. Could Randy Engel have thus uncovered an operation whereby Opus Dei exploits the ADNY’s typical offering of Vatican II catechetical vomit, through the Prelature’s providing Catholic orthodoxy to the children of traditional Catholics of Manhattan’s upper East/West sides? Such an offering would yield both a high degree of confidence for the Prelature on the part of wealthy Catholic Manhattanites, and very conveniently for Opus Dei, generate a large stream of cash that the Archdiocese would never see.

Randy Engel thus centers her investigative searchlight on the Prelature’s secretive practices, which pertain to its organizational structure, financial holdings, membership, and possibly its extra-canonical diocesan cash operations. These questions are apt, warrant clear answers, and correlate with her latest undertaking, the issuance of her e-newsletter Opus Dei Watch. Now what about our questions? Is the author of the massive exposé of clerical faggotry, The Rite of Sodomy, and now hot on the trail of a most peculiar Personal Prelature, interested in the well-documented allegations that the founder Saint Josemaria Escriva was a known homosexual pederast? Is Opus Dei a self-contained, homosexual collective advancing the hom-intern agenda in the Catholic hierarchy? If so, does Opus Dei play a role in the code of silence/denial/cover-up/hush-money-payout that has now even ensnared Bergy the human slag heap? Even more importantly, is her e-newsletter Opus Dei Watch interested in alerting modern (Nostrae-Aetate, friends-of-Israel) Catholics to the reality of the nearly two-thousand year history of the phenomenon known as crypto-Jewry; and the damning evidence that the Personal Prelature of Opus Dei is in no way Catholic and in many ways crypto-Judaic?  Why send out the massively truncated English translation of Opus Judei, which carefully excises those parts of the text which don’t refer to the already-known aspects of Opus Dei as an illicit religious cult of personality?  To be fair, there are reasonable explanations to satisfy these questions. In fact, I myself volunteer, absent an actual Spanish-to-English translator, to translate piecemeal the Spanish Opus Judei online and provide Opus Dei Watch with the result, provided it be published and credited to this site. Finally, Randy Engel has given me assurances that these topics will be dealt with in future releases of Opus Dei Watch.

Opus Dei Watch: Hoping for an unflinching inquiry into all aspects of Opus Dei

Penetrating inquiry is needed to uncover whether or not Opus Dei is the power plant behind the Vatican II hom-intern.  An exhaustive treatment of both the general (crypto-Judaism in the Church) and particular (the crypto-Judaic nature of Opus Dei) will need to be undertaken, and repeated until interested Catholics begin to understand what’s going on here. I look forward to reading such a thorough and unflinching investigative text, and offer my commitment to assist in any way that I am able.

meme actual

8 thoughts on “Conciliar Religion’s Pederast Saint

  1. St. Peter Damien pray for us!! So, so tired of all the homo commies running the institution.

    So the big question is….how long does God allow this diabolical Synagogue of Satan crowd to control His Church?? Ten more? A hundred more? A thousand? Until He returns? At what point do the faithful simply wipe the dust from their feet and become Western/Latin Orthodox without a demi-god Pope? At what point do all the claims (ie Dictatus Papae – 1075 A.D. & Vatican I – 1870 A.D.) of Papal authority and infallibility become COMPLETELY discredited??


    1. Papal Infallibility is a dogma of the Catholic Church. “Orthodoxy” is not the answer to the Church’s problems. It’s a false solution that separates oneself from the Church Christ founded. The problem is Vatican II, its false popes and false hierarchy are allies and enablers of Opus Judei. Crypto Judaism has triumphed with Vatican II. The period of infiltration is over. They have full control. Their revolution has succeeded. Opus Dei’s current job is that of the Thermidor stage. They are trying to pacify spirits who would otherwise come out of their confusion and become true Catholics.

      Liked by 1 person

  2. I’m pleased that you wrote on this topic as it is one that Spanish people get really upset about, & rightly so. Opus Dei are desperately disliked here. They are well-known for taking young boys of around 12-13 years old to Madrid without parental consent for inculcation into a lifestyle that is opposed to Catholic ethos & it is extremely difficult to bring them back home.

    In the sixties my husband & I were invited to a party by our next door neighbours – it turned out to be an Opus Dei meeting to garner new members. The whole evening was given to pressurising those present to not only become members but to give large donations to their organisation. In return you would advance in Opus Dei rapidly & get to the top of the pyramid in next to no time. They disgusted me then & still do as more & more is being revealed about them. I follow Randy & consider her work a blessing for the CC as they have permeated their ideology throughout the prelature &, in succeeding in obtaining a special prelature for themselves, now have the ear of popes & hierarchy alike.

    Fairly recently Opus Dei came up as a topic on a well-known & much esteemed Catholic website. In my comment I warned of the dangers of Opus Dei only to have my knuckles rapped by the co-founder who stood staunchly behind them. The reason came towards the end of his censure – they are very good benefactors to their organisation & had left those days behind. I know hey haven’t & will not be donating to their cause until they disassociate themselves completely from Opus Dei.

    Liked by 2 people

  3. The answer to why the “paralyzing silence of the Catholic hierarchy” could by: it’s not the Catholic hierarchy. It’s a false hierarchy professing the Vatican II religion and allowing Opus Dei to run rampant and devour the flock of Christ. Leading them into the dark workshops of Opus Dei instead of the green pastures of Catholic Tradition.

    Liked by 1 person

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s