l'Opus Dei

99 QUESTIONS ABOUT OPUS DEI: PAVING "THE WAY" TO WHERE?


1. Which way is "The Way?"

2. If it is true about Opus Dei's Catholicity, how come most Catholics have never heard of it?

3. Is it because there are no public manifestations of its Catholicity?

4. Why doesn't the New York City headquarters of Opus Dei have any religious symbols on it to indicate it is Catholic?

5. What is it about the Catholicity of Opus Dei that prompts committed non-Christians to join it?

6. Why don't the innumerable Opus Dei buildings throughout the world disclose that they are the headquarters of "Opus Dei?" (Even the masonic lodge located on the same street as Opus Dei's headquarters in New York has its name on it.)

7. Is it because they are more secret about their identity than the masons?
Escriva's book [The Way] was burned by a group of holy nuns in Spain on the public street outside their convent doors in the 1930's.

8. Is that why Opus affiliate, Antoine Pinay, Prime Minister of France in 1951 who was a part of the reputed "Pinay Circle" was said to belong to the "...most secret of the secret societies?"

9. Does this secrecy explain why most Catholics have never heard of it?

10. Isn't secrecy and Catholicism oxymoronic?

11. Is it just a coincidence that a renowned member of the Rosacrucian secret society was the King of Navarre, a name used to identify Opus Dei's bible, its college, and its principal location in Spain?

12. Why does Opus Dei's largest foundation, Homeland, give thousands of dollars for abortion and fetal experimentation, eg. $25,000 in 1998 to Columbia Presbyterian Gynecological Department's notorious fetal experimentation program?

13. How much investigation has the Vatican done in the many suspicious deaths of uncooperative members Opus Dei in the early years in Spain and South America?

14. Why was the Bishop of Madrid's 1941 approval of Opus Dei as a pious union imprinted with a "secret seal."

15. Was this done because he was the only Bishop in Spain who supported Opus Dei?

16. Why were Opus Dei members, including Msgr. Escriva, accused by Catholics before three separate tribunals in Spain of being a cabalistic and secret masonic society?

17. Why did a convent of nuns in the '30's in Spain burn copies of The Way on the public street outside their convent doors?

18. Why did two popes and virtually all the Bishops of Spain oppose Opus Dei quest for an Ecclesiastical Office for more than 20 years?

19. Did Escriva's statement "…that many, many members are non-Christian" have anything to do with this Catholic opposition?

20. Since when is it part of the Catholic faith to help Jewish Rabbis stay Rabbis, as Opus Dei professes on its own website?

21. When Rabbi Angel Kreiman stated that Msgr. Escriva shows having "....a profound knowledge of talmudic teachings.." did he wonder where Msgr. Escriva got such knowledge?

22. Did Rabbi Kreiman wonder why a Catholic priest is espousing talmudic teachings?

23. Why doesn't any biography of Msgr. Escriva published by Opus Dei affiliates show the indisputable fact that the family name changed from Escriba to Escriva?

24. Does this name-change have anything to do with where Msgr. Escriba got his "...profound knowledge of talmudic teachings" recognized by Rabbi Kreiman?

25. If Opus Dei is not a secret society, why does everyone who is not a member think it is one?

26. What Cardinal Virtue does "holy shamelessness", an Opus Dei maxim, fall under?

27. Does "holy shamelessness" have anything to do with Luther’s maxim, "sin and sin boldly?"

28. Was it members of Opus Dei that proposed Heresiarch Martin Luther for canonization?

29. Why hasn't the Vatican ever condemned Opus Dei prosletyzing techniques that violate the 4th and 8th commandment?

30. Is this because Opus Dei has become the Vatican?

31. FBI spy Robert Hanssen was reported to have discussed with American Opus Dei advisors outside of the confessional of his communist spying activities. Why didn't these American members turn him in?

32. Why hasn't the FBI brought charges against Opus Dei for its well-publicized complicity?

33. Is it because the FBI was headed by Louis Freeh, a known Opus Dei operative?

34. Is that why Freeh resigned on the heels of the arrest of Hanssen?

35. How did spy Hanssen and his wife reconcile their perverted sexual practices in their marriage with Opus Dei membership?

36. Was it because they were told by their Opusian spiritual directors that there was nothing wrong with it?

37. Is someone who uses anti-communist words, but engages in communist actions, a communist?

38. Does he speak like an anti-communist in order to conceal his communism?

39. Is someone who uses catholic-sounding words, but engages in anti-catholic actions, anti-catholic?

40. Does he use catholic sounding words to conceal his anti-catholicism?

41. In defining his members' mission, why does Msgr. Escriba teach Genesis wrongly and point to man's pre-fall status in regard to "work", as if man had the same pre-fall status now? Is this not the heresy of pantheism?

42. If we are in a pre-fall status, would there be any real need for Our Lord Jesus Christ?

43. Is that why the Opus Dei cross is empty?

44. From this teaching, Escriva extrapolates the notion that "work" becomes the pivot upon which the task of sanctification turns. Does this mean there is no salvation for the unemployed?

45. If professional work is the pivot upon which membership is obtained, is Msgr. Escriva stating that salvation for the professional worker can only be found in and through Opus Dei, the place where they must bring home the bacon?

46. Why are Opus Dei's Catholic-sounding teachings only slightly askew from true Catholic teachings?

47. Is it so Catholics who join up won't notice?

48. Do talmudic and cabalistics teachers say that when the jewish messiah comes, non-jews are to be the slaves to jews or eliminated?

49. If one draws all the reasonable inferences from talmudic teachings about the jews, can non-jews be anything else but slaves or dead slaves?

50. Is the enslavement of Opus Dei lay members, who must turn over their salaries to Opus Dei, a sign that the jewish messiah has come?

51. Is that what Rabbi Kreiman saw in the teachings of Msgr. Escriva that the rabbi called "talmudic?"

52. Is that why Msgr. Escriva handed out whips to his Catholic members and told them to beat themselves?

53. Do Msgr. Escriva’s talmudic teachings have any connection with the recently published Vatican document that we must acknowledge the coming of a jewish messiah as taught in talmudic books?

54. Is that why we no longer may convert the jews?

55. For wouldn't a messiah, even a talmudic jewish one, come to convert us and not the other way around?

56. But doesn't Catholicism teach that the Messiah already came?

57. Next time Our Lord Jesus Christ comes, doesn't He come in glory and in judgment?

58. If that's how Our Lord Jesus Christ is going to come the second time, who is this jewish "messiah" that is coming for the first time?

59. Why did Opus member Navarre Vals publicly tell the Catholic world that our acknowledgment of a coming jewish messiah and Hebrew scriptures, including talmudic books, is now "official" Catholic teaching?

60. If we acknowledge talmudic teachings, are we considered talmudic jews, slaves to the talmudic jews; or just Catholics who acknowledge talmudic books?

61. But if we acknowledge talmudic books, then wouldn’t we also acknowledge our role as slaves to the jews?

62. In comparing The Way with his own life, doesn't this put Escriva in the "do as I say", not "do as I do"school?

[Note: The book, The Way by Escriva, should certainly be avoided by Catholics who value their Faith. Quotes from the text of Escriva's book cited here, are provided solely to warn the Faithful against this sophist's poisonous prose.] -The Webmaster

63. Doesn't this hypocrisy have something to do with why Our Lord told the Pharisees that they could not escape damnation?

64. How long after writing Maxim No.___. "Do not seek worldly titles….." published in "The Way" did Msgr. Escriva pay 250,000 pesetas for the non-transferrable royal title for himself, "Marquis of Peralta?"

65. Has there ever been a saint in all the history of the Church who required the laity, under obedience to Msgr. Escriva, to beat themselves?

66. Is he the very first saint ever to hand out whips to others?

67. Does the canonization of Msgr. Escriva imply that a sanctity comes from handing out whips to others?

68. Why were prime eye-witnesses opposed to the canonization barred from testifying during the canonization process?

69. Why was Msgr. Escriva's confessor, Portillo, permitted to testify ad nauseum during the canonization process in direct contradiction to the explicitly laid down rule that the candidate's "confessor" may not be called to testify during the canonization process?

70. Why did the Vatican allow a member of Opus Dei to postulate what is supposed to be an unbiased cause for canonization, when such membership presents innumerable temptations toward bias as well as a clear conflict of interest in the duties of the postulator? Was this conflict made even worse by the conspicuous absence of the duties and office of the Devil's Advocate?

71. In light of Pope Urban VIII explicit pronouncement that without the Devil's Advocate, no canonization is valid, why were the duties and office of the Devil's Advocate eliminated from the norms of canonization?

72. Is this because Portillo and other Opus Dei members sat on the committee that had eliminated the duties and office of Devil's Advocate?

73. Is Escriva's use of the rose with the cross, a clear Rosacrucian symbol, a coincidence or a sign of its adherence to Rosacrucian occultic beliefs?

74. Is this why early Opus member, Miguel Fisac, stated he was asked to wear a white robe during a mysterious initiation ceremony.

75. Why does Opus Dei use the symbol of the empty cross, rather than a crucifix?

76. Doesn't the initiation rite of the Rosacrucians require new members who are Christians to lay down on an empty cross and be tramped by other Rosacrucian members?

77. Is this why only Opus Dei Catholic members are told that the cross is empty so that they may put themselves on it?

78. Is this why only the Catholic members of Opus Dei are required to beat themselves?

79. What was the reason why Jose Maria Escriba changed his name to (1) Jose Maria Escriva, and then again to (2) Jose Maria Escriva de Balaguer, and then again to (3) Josemaria Escriva de Balaguer and then again to (4) Josemaria Escriva de Balaguer y Albas, and then again to (5) Josemaria Escriva de Balguer y Albas, Marquis de Peralta?

80. If Opus Dei was made a "secular institute" in 1947, why then did it come under the jurisdiction of the "Congregation for Religious?"

81. Was it because it could only get status by being in a religious state with a secular mission?

82. Wasn't that why they were recognized by Rome only as a state in life that seeks perfection?

83. Isn't that why it came under the authority of the Congregation for Religious?

84. Doesn't this mean that it was not "unique" after all?

85. Was it a just coincidence that Msgr. Escriva received his supernatural "calling" to ordain priests shortly before going to Rome to seek recognition and get some kind of status?

86. Was it a supernatural "calling" that gave him the idea to ordain priests, contradicting his own unique plan for Opus Dei, before taking that trip to Rome?

87. Or was it because Msgr. Escriva could not otherwise get any juridical recognition from Rome?

88. How is it that the first three priests of Opus Dei, including Portillo, were ordained only 18 short months after Msgr. Escriba "asked them" to become priests?

89. Did the Bishop who ordained them put them in a speed-reading seminary?

90. Why does Msgr. Escriva and Opus Dei say that "...they call Opus Dei men to become priests only on an as needed basis?"

91. Before that trip to Rome in 1947 to seek recognition, were those first priests called by Msgr. Escriva on an "as needed" basis?

92. Wouldn't this kind of calling contradict the Catholic teaching that man receives his calling to the priesthood from God?

93. Wouldn't this make Opus' "ordaining priests on an as needed basis" a calling from a boss other than God?

94. Would that mean that Msgr. Escriva and Opus Dei are earthly bosses who are usurping the rights of God?

95. Does anyone know of any other earthly people who want to usurp the rights of God and become gods on earth?

96. Did Msgr. Escriva think he was God when he asked Portillo and the other two men to become priests?

97. Did Portillo and the other two men believe that Msgr. Escriva's "request" was God's request?

98. Did they think Msgr. Escriva was God?

99. Is that why Msgr. Escriva is called "THE" father?

THE OPUS DEI CULT

The following excellent article was written by an Attorney who has researched and documented many glaring examples of the unsaintliness of Monsignor Escriva and his Talmudic-based pseudo-Catholic organization Opus Dei.

Caution: There is some extremely lewd dialogue that Monsignor Escriva spoke which is documented and cited in this historically important article, which should not be read at all by young readers.

[Disclaimer: While on earth, Jesus founded a visible Church with a visible Head. He promised to remain with this Church to the end of time. We must remember this and not be scandalized when we see corruption . . . there have always been bad grapes in the vineyard. Let us not abandon Peter because of Judas! Only the Roman Catholic Church can trace her roots from Peter to the *present day. In regards to this *present day, the Webmaster by applying correct theological principles to the current "visible" government in Rome, holds the view that *John Paul II was a manifest heretic, and thus ipso facto could not have been a valid pope. In fact he (JP2) for a variety of reasons, such as falling under the ex cathedra condemnation of His Holiness, Pope Paul IV's 1559 A.D. Papal Bull *Cum ex Apostolatus Officio, could never have been a lawful pontiff (Note: this infallible Papal Bull Cum ex Apostolatus Officio invalidates the most recent usurpers claim, Benedict XVI, of legitimacy also.) Any references to alleged "beatifications" or "canonizations" performed by this usurper of Church property [JP2] are without substance.

Objective Truth: A lawful and true Pope is always the Ruler of the Earth, and Head Authority during normal Catholic times. However, in the absence of this authority, truth, the mind's conformity to reality, obviously still exists, is objective, and must be sought. -The Webmaster]

"OPEN LETTER TO MR. JOHN MARTIN, NEW YORK AUTHOR OF *"LEOPARDS IN THE TEMPLE"
(by a Reader of this widely circulated article)
"Even the Divinity of Our Lord Jesus Christ, who Escriva teaches was not more than one of his most loved Jews takes a back seat in this organization..."

August 2002 A.D.

Dear Mr. Martin:

I am very grateful for your article, "Leopards in the Temple." Thank God there was at least one Catholic to take them apart. There are so many of them; they are so powerful; and they are so dangerous to the Faith. Someone told me that there was one historical case of an "un-sainting," but they did not name the person or the date. I cannot find any documentation on this, and I have no reason to believe it to be true.

I am sure that in your research you became, like me, very disturbed by the fundamental nature of Opus Dei which does not appear to be reconcilable with the Catholic Faith. The more I studied the problem, the more self-evident it was. I believe that much of the confusion about this prelature is in the absence of the documentation which is supposed to fundament it. There is not only the absence of any constitution that, if published at all, is in Latin
[Note: the author is not slighting the universal language of the Church (Latin) here, but is merely alluding to the reality that today’s "enlightened" post-conciliar Catholics no longer know this sacred language to their own detriment. – The Webmaster] but also the absence of the theological study that was performed before the prelature was granted. This theological study, which was in fact done, is also not open for review by anyone and no adequate explanation is given for the secrecy, especially since its members are sought among the laity. Therefore, all we have to recommend its existence is the personal recommendation of the Holy Father, his "high sign" which we are expected to accept, without question, and without the underlying documentation that fundaments his stamp of approval.

But traditional Catholic teaching shows us that what prior popes referred to derisively as a "new form" is not reconcilable with the Faith. The fundament for the change of canon law was developed at *Vatican II. *[Note: see the following link on the Apostate Vatican II Council -The Webmaster] Yet in attacking it, are we not attacking the Pope personally, or worse, the papacy? We are held at bay in this charade. Is it not surprising therefore that most of the opposition comes from the Protestants, or the liberal Catholics, but in their error, their arguments cannot be wholly as sound as a Catholic schooled in the Faith?

The Church defines the three states in life: the single, the married and the religious state. Their duties are defined. Opus Dei does worse than blur these definitions in identity and in duties. Opus Dei clashes distinct and separate identities and forms a brand new identity – the numerary. [The word numerary means "coin" which should give the reader an idea at least of what they are used for. -The Webmaster] The numerary therefore is not a product of Catholic thought, like for instance, the "third order," but of dialectics, subscribed to by the communists, but originally conceived in talmudic and kabalistic teachings, teachings which tragically evolved in Judaism after Christ’s rejection. As a product of dialectics, how, then, can this numerary know what he/she is and what is expected of him/her. Only confusion is engendered, for it is impossible for faith and reason, which go hand in hand, to inform you of your state and of your duties – about what God expects of you and what He does not. To know your duties as a member of Opus Dei, natural reason is by necessity suspended, and for this reason members are more inclined to turn over their wills to the Dr. Frankenstein who designed this artificially constructed "new form" using dialectical constructs, which are in fact talmudic in teachings and concepts, which some Opus Dei members (i.e., Rabbi Kreiman) confess are talmudic. Is this not a plausible explanation for the zombie-like qualities and the Pavlovian gestures, so visible in its membership? It is simply not possible for natural reason to assist you in of what you should do and should not do in this artificially constructed state.

je hurle après ce que Wojtyla a nommé saint.

The accoutrements of Catholicism are used and used wrongly, and with the documentation missing, the only thing that we have that informs us that it is not Catholic is the traditional teaching of the Church, our only guide in judging this "new form." Viewed closely, there are many elements of classical Judaism (Judaism after Christ), and for that reason they are more dangerous than the most vitriolic liberal Catholic, because if it is conceived in talmudic Judaism, it is anti-Christ.

Considering their stronghold in Rome, considering their numbers, considering their invisibility, will those fallen away Catholics and converts returning to the Church come back to Catholicism, or an Opusian cult, not popular and universal, but elitist and exclusive, another trait of talmudic Judaism. The articulated extraneous apostolate, about the sanctity of work, the blessings of work, dreamed up by Escriva and lauded by more than one Jewish rabbi as talmudic, do not reflect but distort clear Catholic doctrine about the nature of work.

[Disclaimer: Mr. Michael Davies quoted below (now deceased) was not a friend of Traditional Catholicism as some have mistakenly thought. He (Mr. Davies) had ties with Opus Dei, and many other anti-Catholic, subversive elements that falsely claim the name Catholic. Also note the, "modern Mass," spoken of (below) i.e. the Novus Ordo/New Order "Mass" has theologically been proven to, not be a true Mass; i.e. it is invalid. Please see the following prophecy by Venerable Anna-Kartarina-Emmeirck about this abominable "modern Mass".

Ven. Anna-Kartarina Emmerick (19th Century): "I saw again the new and odd-looking church which they were trying to build. There was nothing holy about it... People were kneading bread in the crypt below... but it would not rise, nor did they receive the body of Our Lord, but only bread. Those who were in error, through no fault of their own, and who piously and ardently longed for the Body of Jesus were spiritually consoled, but not by their communion. Then, my Guide [Jesus] said: 'THIS IS BABEL.' [The Mass in many languages]."
(This prophecy was made circa 1820 by Anna-Katarina Emmerick, a stigmatized Augustinian nun and is recorded in
The Life of Anne Catherine Emmerich by Rev. Carl E. Schmoeger, C.SS.R.) -The Webmaster

In the modern Mass, the following prayer replaces the Suscipe, Sancta Pater:

"Blessed are you, Lord, God of all creation. Through your goodness we have this bread to offer, which earth has given and human hands have made. It will become for us the bread of life."

Michael Davies, in his book, Liturgical Revolution (Vol. 3), p.320, quotes Fr. Charles E. Coughlan, who explained:

"This prayer is a combination of a prayer taken from the Jewish meal ritual and the concept of man’s work consecrated to the Lord, an idea which the *Pope [*Note: not a true Pope, but a Vatican II anti-pope -The Webmaster] himself wanted to be expressed in some way at this point in the Mass."

Michael Davies concludes,

". . . this prayer is thus acceptable not simply to Protestants, but to Jews and would certainly fit in with the ethos of a Masonic hall."

In reading the prayer, one sees clearly the apostolate of Opus Dei.

I have gone over the history of Msgr. Escriva and his group, and it is very clear in the books I’ve read and am reading, including *Hutchinson’s book (see footnotes) and Opus Dei’s book, The Canonical Path of Opus Dei, that Escriva was viewed with suspicion by the then reigning popes, to wit, Pius XI and Pius XII, but he kept coming to Rome and was granted incessant audiences with these popes who would shew him away, giving him Blessed Mother medals (Note: The webmaster does not ascribe to the use of words in the last sentence if it denigrates in any way the Blessed Mother, however, he believes this was not the intent of the author of this fine article), but no recognition. He was highly visible and always there, getting this and that citation, this and that medal.

As a lawyer who has rubbed shoulders with the worst of politicians, I can tell you this is the way you become visible, it is the way to power, particularly when you have no talent and nothing of substance to offer the political leadership. In any event, over the years, after making so many trips to Rome and getting so many medals, he began to repeatedly ask for recognition, but the popes always refused him, derisively calling the apostolate, a "new form," which could not be reconciled judicially with the Faith. Eventually [anti-pope] John XXIII came along and told Escriva that, while he could not recognize the apostolate, the cardinals would work on the necessary documentation at Vatican II which would then supply the fundament to change the canon law of 1917. He and his "new form" could then be recognized.

Portillo, the right hand man of Escriva, had a very important position during Vatican II, and sat on the canonical commission that revamped the 1917 canon law, which was completed in 1983. [Note: The 1983 Code of Canon Law must be rejected by true Catholics- The Webmaster] (He also incidentally sat on the committee of the Congregation of the Causes of the Saints, at the time that the "devil’s advocate" was dispensed with.)

Believing Escriva’s loud declarations that he wanted ". . .nothing to do with Vatican II because of its liberal agenda", Escriva and his "new form" had a vital interest in getting the liberal agenda of this Council passed because their very existence depended upon it. Without Vatican II, Opus Dei, and its progeny, i.e., NeoCathecuman Way, Communion and Liberation, Focolare, ‘Arche, and Christi Fidelis (yes, Christi Fidelis) cannot exist at all. I submit, if Vatican II is ever condemned by the Church, they will all be condemned.

This "new form" artificially constructed through dialectics, is another blow or better, a clashing between lay and religious, and creates a bizarre new state, a new identity, which may one day replace the priesthood. The theological fundament is absent, but we are able to find some of the Vatican II fundament in the official documentation of Christifidelis, the foundational documents of the religio-lay ministry developed at Vatican II. The goal of this bizarre Opusian lay ministry, the brainstorm of Escriva, conceived in talmudic teachings, irreconcilable with the Faith before Vatican II, becomes clear with close scrutiny.

This objective, this goal of replacing the priesthood can be proven through the mouths of Opus Dei, via its member priests, its lay members and in its publications. One Opus Dei priest [... ] explicitly told one of my correspondents [an ex-cooperator] that Opus Dei ". . .did not want to ordain too many priests, only enough to confect the sacrament." Have you or any other Catholic ever in your life heard another Catholic say that they did not want priests? To make this statement is not to be Catholic. The Society of the Order of the Holy Cross, believed to be a society of priests, is actually a society of laymen, more particularly male members drawn from the professions and business, who receive "spiritual formation" in the Society, and who are "called on an as needed basis" to the priesthood.

This statement comes directly from the Canonical Path of Opus Dei, their own book! Usually, these men are ordained late in life, and come from the professions, and these traits, as well as their political conservatism, are the only tell-tale signs that give them away as Opus Dei priests is, because they are sent to the local seminaries and are ordained by the local ordinaries, and are not otherwise recognizable as Opus Dei, but this is how they were set up in their foundational documents – to be unidentifiable. [Note: "Fr." George Rutler, an EWTN "favorite" is a member of the Society of the Order of the Holy Cross, though few Catholic's know this fact, which is part of Opus Dei’s Masonic-like policies of concealment. – The Webmaster]

I suggest to you that this publicity about perverted priests comes from them, and now they are providing the answer to this scandal, because I believe that it is they who have set up the organization, Voice of the Faithful. Thousands upon thousands of lay people forming this group, led by "professional and educated men" (the usual target of Opus Dei), are meeting in large convention centers all around the nation, and they are setting up ways for the laity to completely take over the Church. Opus Dei has the organization, the clout as well as the money, to galvanize this immense force of "conservative" Catholics herded into convention centers to respond to the publicity and scandal about the priests. Opus Dei exposes the scandal and at the same time provides the response – a Church composed of a lay-religio ministry, consisting of only some priests, who do not receive their calling from God, but from Opus Dei, and only on an "as needed" basis, until, no doubt, when they are "needed" no longer.

Escriva insinuated himself slowly over the years into the good graces of the reigning popes who viewed what they called a "new form" with suspicion and derision. It is a "new form," resembling nothing in tradition, created without precedent, through dialectics, and irreconcilable with the Faith. Its only foundation is a sea of watery words and ambiguities found in Vatican II documentation. Such a form is given license to be whoever and whatever they like. In its foundational documents it is designed to have a built-in secrecy; a built-in unidentifiability; a chameleon-like definition, an apostolate, confessedly talmudic, which, by scheme and design provides a worldly and world-wide secret political power base under its tight and complete control, all under the name of Catholicism. Even its supernatural elements, which focus on the archangels who also play a major role in talmudic and kabalistic writings and in Masonic halls. The other supernatural focus turns on their one true saint-to-be, Escriva.

I am going to quote from Carmen del Tapia. I think you would serve your purposes very well in publishing these remarks on your website. Carmen del Tapia has never recanted these words.

Excerpts quoted from Carmen del Tapia’s book, *Beyond the Threshold (Continuum Publishing Co., 1999), pp.269-77:

SECOND CANONICAL ADMONITION

Toward the middle of May of that year, the earth seemed to shake beneath my feet. I was summoned on the run, as always, to the sessions chamber of the central advisory. Monsignor Escriva was seated at the head of the table, with Father Francisco Vives and Father Javier Echevarria on his left, Don Alvaro del Portillo was absent. At Father’s right were the central directress, Mercedes Morado, and Marlies Kucking, in her new capacity as secretary of the central advisory. I was told to sit between Mercedes Morado and Marlies Kucking.

Shouting, puffing and beside himself, Monsignor Escriva said, "Look, Carmen, this has to end. You are not going to laugh up your sleeve at us."

Complaining that she had opened up a post office box to receive mail from the outside, Escriva said:

"What is this, you great hypocrite, you deceiver, wicked woman? And that procuress, Gladys, that sow, let her come in!"

[THE READER SHOULD KEEP IN MIND THAT GLADYS IS CALLED A SOW (i.e., a pig) BY THIS "SAINT" FOR HAVING COMMITTED THE GRIEVOUS MORAL OFFENSE OF HELPING CARMEN DEL TAPIA OPEN A POST OFFICE BOX SO THAT SHE COULD RECEIVE MAIL – MAIL WHICH HAD BEEN WITHHELD BY OPUS DEI OFFICIALS.]

Speaking to Gladys, Escriva screamed, "Do you take letters to the post office for her, for this wicked woman? Do you comprehend the gravity of what you have done…Answer, ANSWER."

…Gladys said, "Yes, Father."

Monsignor Escriva breathed deeply before going on. "You will no longer work for the central advisory. You will not set foot upstairs on the advisory office floor. Let them find you some other job in the house. And now, go to your room and don’t leave it for any reason? Do you hear? For any reason!"

When Gladys left the sessions chamber, Monsignor Escriva told the central directress and Marlies Kucking, in the presence of the priests already mentioned, "After this, take that one," he said, referring to Gladys, "lift up her skirt, take down her panties, and whack her on the behind until she talks. MAKE HER TALK."

[THE READER SHOULD KEEP IN MIND THAT ROME CONSIDERS THE MAN WHO MADE THESE STATEMENTS TO HAVE REACHED THE HIGHEST DEGREE OF SANCTITY ON EARTH.]

Addressing me, Monsignor Escriva shouted, "I give you the second admonition, hypocrite. You write me a letter on my saint’s day, telling me you want to begin again, and this is what you do to me! Tell these people everything, everything. You’re a bad piece of work. I warn you that I’m waiting for some affidavits from Venezuela, and you will find out what’s trouble. You’re a wicked woman, sleazy, scum. That’s what you are!"

[THE READER SHOULD KEEP IN MIND THAT THESE WORDS OF MSGR. ESCRIVA, WHO HAS BEEN BEATIFIED AND WILL BE CANONIZED ON OCTOBER 6, 2002 CONSTITUTE THE WORDS OF A PRIEST WHO HAS REACHED THE PINNACLE OF HOLINESS.]

THIRD CANONICAL ADMONITION

…He (Escriva) went on: "And don’t return to Venezuela! Don’t even think of writing to anybody there. Because if you even think of going to Venezuela, I will assume the responsibility of telling the Cardinal what you are. And it would dishonor you!" Pacing the room, he continued, shouting at me: "I was thinking all night about whether to tell you this or not, but I believe it is better that I should tell you." Looking directly at me with a dreadful rage, moving his arms toward me as if he was going to hit me, he added at the top of his voice,…

[THE READER SHOULD KEEP IN MIND THAT THESE MOTIONS OF A MAN TOWARD A WOMAN WERE ENGAGED IN BY A PRIEST WHO IS SAID TO HAVE RECEIVED ALL THE GIFTS AND FRUITS OF THE HOLY GHOST IN ABUNDANCE, WHICH WOULD INCLUDE "MILDNESS."]

…"You are a wicked woman. A lost woman! Mary Magdalene was a sinner, but you? You are a seductress with your immorality and indecency! You are a seductress. I know everything. EVERYTHING! EVEN ABOUT THE VENEZUELAN NEGRO! YOU ARE ABOMINABLE. YOU HAVE A WEAKNESS FOR BLACKS. First one and then the other! LEAVE MY PRIESTS ALONE! DO YOU HEAR? LEAVE THEM ALONE! You’re wicked, Wicked! Indecent! Come on, look at the business of the Negro! And don’t ask me for my blessing because I don’t intend to give it to you!"

…he turned around to shout a final insult. "Hear me well! WHORE, SOW…"

While Monsignor Escriva shouted his insults, I had only two thoughts: One, that Christ remained silent in the face of accusations; the other, that God had liberated me…

[WHILE THE ABOVE CONSTITUTES THE QUOTED STATEMENTS OF A PRIEST WHO WILL BE CANONIZED FOR HIS EXAMPLE OF HOLINESS ON OCTOBER 6, 2002. MARIA DEL TAPIA HAS NEVER RECANTED ANY OF THESE STATEMENTS ASSIGNED TO MSGR. ESCRIVA.]

Even the Divinity of Our Lord Jesus Christ, who Escriva teaches was not more than one of his most loved Jews (Note: please see the exact text of Rabbi Kreiman's recounting of Escriva’s teachings about Christ that were taken directly from Opus Dei’s Official Website by clicking here) takes a back seat in this organization conceived in talmudic thought, it is anti-Christ. I believe this group was instituted and formed by Jews long ago as a part of their age-old plot of infiltration to destroy their greatest nemesis and obstacle to their quest for worldly power – the Catholic Church.


The death dealing tounges of heretics will not prevail against the The Holy Roman Catholic Church.
Indefectibility is One of the Four Marks of the Catholic Church

[Indefectibility means that the Catholic Church will last until the end of time. The enemies who try to destroy Her (The Church) from without, or even worse yet, from within, will all be crushed by The Rock that was instituted by Christ the King at the price of His Precious Blood. We must fervently pray that the "destroyers" of the Church are promptly vanquished and that She (The Church) reigns on earth in the fullness of liberty and exaltation as God demands. -The Webmaster]



One must agree that Escriva’s concepts in designing this "new form" were inspired by talmudic and kabalistic teachings because they confess as much via Rabbi Kreiman. It is a "new form," without precedent in the traditions of the Church; it is a worldly and world-wide group; it is fundamented in talmudic concepts that are askew with the Faith; and it is an ever-expanding group, with a built-in invisibility and unidentifiability, that has infiltrated the Church to such an extent that in Rome it has been called "the only 800 lb. gorilla on the block" – which incidentally is the same Rome that recently put out a very timely document, as far as Israel and the Jews are concerned, which propagates that we Catholics must acknowledge and welcome the coming of a Jewish messiah (and the Talmud teaches that the messiah is the Jewish people themselves!) as well as instructing Catholics not to attempt (under pain of sin?) to convert the Jews. This document is certainly in complete accord with talmudic teaching, for if the Jewish people are the messiah, as the Talmud teaches, they certainly would not be in need of conversion, would they? The messiah, as you know, comes to convert us, and not the other way around.

Note from The Webmaster: Please compare the above paragraph with the Catholic truth about the Deicides, as taught by Doctor of the Church, Holy St. Augustine:

"The Jews knew that Christ was the son of David. And even now they hope for His Coming. It is hidden from them that He has come, but it is hidden because they willed it so. For, not acknowledging Him on the cross, the knowledge of Him reigning in glory should not be theirs ... Why are the Jews hoping for what has already come, and not fearful for what is to come? For Our Lord Jesus Christ ... referred Himself as "the Stone" (Matthew xxi.44), that whoever stumbles upon it shall be bruised; but upon whom it shall fall, it will grind to powder ... Lying on the ground, it shakes whoever falls over it; coming from on high, it crushes the proud. The Jews have already been shaken by their previous stumble. What awaits them is to be crushed by His Coming." -St. Augustine

The Catholic Church infallibly teaches: Extra Ecclesiam Nulla Salus. [Translation: Outside of the Church there is no salvation.]
Unbalanced anti-Semitism is condemned by Traditional Church teaching, as it is sinful to hate a person for their race. Still, Catholic Tradition teaches it is incumbent on every Catholic to oppose with all their energy perfidious Jewish Nationalism. Pray that the willful blindness of the Jews will cease and they will convert to the only means of salvation for all mankind, the Roman Catholic Church. -The Webmaster

Its form, its definition, its rules – its very foundation – are designed to use and enslave, in secrecy, its non-Jewish membership and this enslavement is also in total and complete accord with the talmudic writings which teach that when the Jews finally come into power (as messiah), they are either to enslave the non-Jew or eradicate him. See Shahak, Israel, The Influence of Judaism on the Jewish People.

I am having their constitution and fundamental documents translated by Fr. Murphy. The documents are published in the back of the Opus Dei book, Canonical Path of Opus Dei. You cannot obtain the official documents because Rome keeps them under lock and key at the request of Opus Dei. Further, you cannot get the report of the theological study that was done. This is also under lock and key in Rome, and is not published in the back of the Opus Dei book.

I am also sending you some of my notes and web-site papers that may be of interest to you. Thank you again for writing the article. I was very gratified to see it.

Yours Truly,

(The Webmaster has deemed it prudent to keep the name of writer of this letter private)

Humilis Miles a écrit:

je hurle après ce que Wojtyla a nommé saint.

Les amis de nos ennemis ne sont pas nécessairement nos ennemis.

Si Ratzi canonise la voyante du Laus (Benoîte Rencurel), il ne faudra pas "hurler après" ! Idem pour de nombreux vrais saints, canonisés par la secte conciliaire. C'est précisément parce que ce sont de vrais saints que la secte veut se les approprier.

LE CULTE OPUS DEI

L’article suivant est un excellent papier écrit par un avocat qui rechercha et documenta plusieurs exemples éclatants quant à la non-sainteté de Monseigneur Escriva et sa soi-disant organisation catholique, de souche talmudique.

ATTENTION : Vous trouvez dans les lignes suivantes un dialogue extrêmement cru de la part de Monseigneur Escriva et qui est documenté et cité, dans cet important article historique, qui ne doit pas être lu en aucun cas par de jeunes lecteurs.

[Déni de responsabilité: Étant sur terre, Jésus institua une Église visible avec une Autorité visible. Il promit d’être avec son Église jusqu’à la fin du monde. Nous devons bien nous souvenir de ceci et ne pas être scandalisés quand nous voyons la corruption… il y eut toujours de mauvais raisins dans le vignoble. N’abandonnons pas Pierre à cause de Judas ! L’Église catholique seule a des racines qui remontent de Saint Pierre jusqu’à *aujourd’hui. En ce qui concerne cet *aujourd’hui, le Webmestre, en appliquant les principes théologiques corrects en ce qui a trait au gouvernement "visible" à Rome, maintient que Jean-Paul II était un hérétique manifeste, et, par le fait même, n’a pu être pape valide. En fait, il (JPII), pour une multitude de raisons, étant sous le coup de la condamnation ex cathedra de S.S. le Pape Paul IV (1559) par la Bulle papale * Cum ex Apostolatus Officio , ne put jamais être un pontife légitime. ( Note : cette Bulle papale infaillible Cum ex Apostolatus Officio invalide également le droit de légitimité du plus récent usurpateur, Benoit XVI.) Toutes allusions à de prétendues "béatifications" ou "canonisations" opérées par cet usurpateur de ce qui appartient en propre à l’Église, sont sans substance.


Vérité objective : Un vrai et légitime Pape est toujours le Souverain de la terre et l’Autorité Suprême durant des périodes catholiques normales. Cependant, en l’absence ladite autorité, la vérité, qui est la conformité de notre esprit à la réalité, demeure malgré tout, est objective, et doit être recherchée. Le webmestre.]

Un vrai et légitime Pape est toujours le Maitre de la terre

Escriva le marrane

Humilis Miles a écrit:

Un vrai et légitime Pape est toujours le Maitre de la terre

??????

Escriva le marrane

???????

Pour ce qui est de "Maitre" je vais faire la correction... pour celle-ci j'aurais pu faire mieux...

Pour "marrane" je le laisse tel quel... je n'ai essayé que de faire la meilleure traduction possible.

Un vrai et légitime Pape est toujours le Souverain de la terre

Humilis Miles a écrit:

Un vrai et légitime Pape est toujours le Souverain de la terre

vous le pensez vraiment ????????????

Et Escriva était-il de souche juive ???????

votre citation ne cadre pas avec vos questions...

Humilis Miles a écrit:

votre citation ne cadre pas avec vos questions...

J'ions p'têt' mal dit c'que j'pensions ...

J'le r'dis don' :

Pensez-vous vraiment que le pape soit le souverain de toute la terre ?

Escriva était-il marrane, donc de souche juive ?

Humilis Miles a écrit:ah oui, j'ai vu ...

C'est pas le tout d'affirmer, il faut prouver.

"LETTRE OUVERTE À M. JOHN MARTIN, AUTEUR NEW-YORKAIS DES * "LÉOPARDS DANS LE TEMPLE"

(par un lecteur de cet article largement diffusé)

" Notre-Seigneur Jésus-Christ, qui est un des Juifs qu’il aime le plus, et qu’il enseigne, eh bien! sa divinité est ravalée au second plan dans cette organisation."

Août, an de grâce 200.
Cher M. Martin :

Je vous suis très reconnaissant pour votre article, "Léopards dans le Temple." Remercions Dieu qu’il y eut au moins un catholique pour les critiquer. Ils sont tellement nombreux; ils sont si puissants et si dangereux pour la Foi. On m’a dit qu’il existait un cas historique de "décanonnisation", mais on ne m’a dit ni le nom de cette personne, ni à quelle date. Je n’ai trouvé aucune documentation à ce sujet, et n’ai aucune raison de croire en la véracité d’une telle information.

Je suis assuré que dans votre recherche vous êtes devenu, tout comme moi, très troublé par la nature fondamentale de l’Opus Dei, qui n’apparait pas être conciliable avec la Foi catholique. Plus j’étudie le problème, plus la chose me devient évidente. Je crois que le gros de la confusion en ce qui concerne cette prélature, vient du fait de l’absence de documentation qui devrait en poser les fondements. Il n’y pas seulement absence de toute constitution, qui si elle est le moindrement publiée, elle doit l’être en Latin,


[Note : l’auteur n’est pas offensant à l’égard de la langue universelle de l’Église (le Latin) ici, mais fait simplement allusion à la réalité, qu’aujourd’hui les "illuminés" catholiques d’après-concile ne connaissent plus ce langage sacré à leur propre détriment. – Le webmestre.]


mais également l’absence de toute étude théologique qui devait être accomplie avant que ladite prélature fut octroyée. Cette étude théologique fut faite en effet, mais fut également fermée à toute critique de qui que ce soit et de ce qu’aucune explication adéquate n’est donnée à propos de tout ce secret, spécialement depuis que ses membres sont recrutés parmi les laïcs. En conséquence, tout ce que nous possédons pour recommander son existence, c’est l’aval personnel du Saint-Père, son arrogance arbitraire que nous sommes censés accepter, sans aucune question, et sans aucune documentation sous-jacente qui servent d’assises à son approbation.


Mais l’enseignement traditionnel catholique nous apprend que ce que les papes précédents nous montraient, d’un ton moqueur, comme étant une "nouvelle forme" n’est pas conciliable avec la Foi. La base du changement de la loi canonique fut élaborée à *Vatican II. *

[Note : voyez le lien suivant sur le concile apostat Vatican II – Le webmestre]


En l’attaquant, n’attaquons-nous pas le Pape personnellement, ou pire, la papauté ? Nous sommes tenus en échec par ce faux-semblant. N’est-ce donc pas surprenant que la plus grande partie des opposants soit du côté des protestants, ou des catholiques libéraux, bien que dans leur errance, leurs arguments ne peuvent être tout à fait aussi solides qu’un catholique aguerri dans la Foi ?

"LETTRE OUVERTE À M. JOHN MARTIN, AUTEUR NEW-YORKAIS DES * "LÉOPARDS DANS LE TEMPLE" (suite)


L’Église définit les trois états de vie : le célibat, le mariage et l’état religieux. Leurs devoirs sont définis. L’Opus Dei fait pire que de brouiller les états et les devoirs de ces états. L’Opus Dei fait disparaitre les caractéristiques distinctes et séparées de ces états, et façonne un tout nouvel état – le numéraire. (n.d.t.= Le mot « numéraire » signifie "monnaie en espèces qui a un cours légal, argent liquide.") ce qui peut donner une idée au lecteur ce à quoi ils sont employés. – Le webmestre]

Le numéraire, par conséquent, n’est pas le fruit de la pensée catholique, comme par exemple, le "troisième ordre", mais plutôt le fruit de la dialectique, à laquelle étaient abonnés les communistes, mais originellement conçue dans les enseignements talmudiques et cabalistiques, enseignements qui ont tragiquement évolués vers le judaïsme, après le rejet de Notre-Seigneur.

Étant un dérivé de la dialectique, alors comment ce numéraire peut savoir ce qu’il/qu’elle est et ce qui attendu de celui-ci/celle-là. Ceci n’engendre que confusion, car il est impossible pour la foi et la raison, qui vont ensemble, de vous informer quel est votre état et quels sont vos devoirs – sur ce que Dieu exige de vous et sur ce qu’Il n’exige pas.

Connaitre vos devoirs en tant que membre de l’Opus Dei, la raison naturelle étant nécessairement suspendue, ce qui fait que les membres sont plus enclins à tourner leurs volontés vers le Docteur Frankenstein qui conçut cette "nouvelle forme", artificiellement élaborée, en utilisant des concepts dialectiques, qui sont en fait talmudiques en leurs enseignements et concepts, comme l’ont avoué certains membres de l’Opus Dei, tel que le Rabbin Kreiman, que ces concepts sont effectivement talmudiques.

N’est-ce pas une explication plausible concernant les attributs quasi-zombie et les gestes pavloviens, très visible chez leurs adhérents ? Il n’est tout simplement pas possible à la raison naturelle de vous aider en quelque manière que ce soit de ce que vous devez faire ou ne pas faire en cet état artificiellement construit.

Montini [alias Antipape Paul VI] avec le juif marrane, Josemaria Escriva, fondateur du culte Opus Dei. Montini joyeusement dit à Escriva à Rome: "Tutto qui è Opus Dei" (Traduc. : "Tout est Opus Dei ici.")

Montini [alias Antipape Paul VI] avec le juif marrane, Josemaria Escriva, fondateur du culte Opus Dei. Montini joyeusement dit à Escriva à Rome: "Tutto qui è Opus Dei" (Traduc. : "Tout est Opus Dei ici.")