Sunday, June 17, 2012

BANNED!!! (part1)

Julia Mae Banned from the 

Catholic Answers Forum! 

 Film at...

... uh... oh, well, okay, there's no film.  Not exactly unexpected, was it?  LOL!  However, I did love the mod starting a thread that was titled something like "Report Banned Posters" about a minute before he banned me.

Seriously, guys, it's okay.   I really can live without posting on CAF for a month.  See, I wouldn't even think about getting an alter for a banning.  Though they will  probably be perma-banning me soon.  Anyway, here's the PM from Thomas Casey: I'm not exactly arguing with them, they get to keep or ban anyone they want.  My question is:

Why does stating the facts about Opus Dei constitute an attack on their reputation?

I didn't make up the rules and systems by which Opus Dei runs.  I didn't invent the "servants" class of female members, Escriva did and they still have it, though they've renamed it.  The women do all the cooking, cleaning, laundry, whatever menial stuff has to be done in the Centers.  That's just how it works.  IF they get some sort of pay, they sign those checks back over to Opus Dei. 

Now, if the simple truth about the way Opus Dei operates is an attack and can harm the "good name" of the organization, well, doesn't that mean there's something wrong with the organization? 

Was it "martinet" he didn't like?  I can see that, it's considered a fairly pejorative term usually, but, what else to call them, I'm not sure.  Escriva called Opus Dei an "army," not me, and the strict adherence to form, perfect obedience, the designation of who has authority in all situations, even when the two lowliest members find themselves alone together carefully delineated in the rules, is this:

mar·ti·net  (märtn-t)
1. A rigid military disciplinarian.
2. One who demands absolute adherence to forms and rules.

Opus Dei has lots of money and power.  Maybe this is what was supposed to be an attack on them?  But they do.  That NY building cost them about 47 mil from reports online and that was a while back.  Opus Dei lends money to the Vatican Bank, gets Popes elected, I mean, that's money and power. 

Maybe Thomas Casey thinks, as CAF is an Opus Dei apostolate and all the mods are part of the "faithful," that because he, as Supernumerary or Cooperator or whatever, doesn't live in a Center or see the women servants, or have much money himself, maybe he thinks I was attacking him, or that these things aren't the norm.   Or maybe he has been led to believe he is an actual member of the Prelature of Opus Dei.  But of course, he is not.  Only clerics are actual members of the Prelature. 

Thomas, I'm so sorry, but like most of the body of the so-called "faithful" you have been at least misled and at most lied to.  My description was not an attack, just an unvarnished and accurate description of the what Opus Dei is for those clerics who are actually members of the Prelature, and the topic was prelatures:
" As far as Opus Dei specifically being "sweet" well, it doesn't attract me at all, but if you want to be a martinet with a lots of money and power and women servants to do the cleaning cooking and so forth, I guess it's a great deal."
The sentence was in response to another post, I'll put it here.  Part 2 of this is below, I posted it first as I don't think this makes sense without the original set of posts. 

Originally Posted by JReducation View Post
To answer your question, how do I know this -- I was educated by Opus Dei at Holy Cross in Rome.
The information doesn't reflect reality. If this was explained to you this way, it's incorrect. 

If you read my post above, Opus Dei has been more than orthodox and more than faithful.
No one but the highest level of Opus Dei knows what they've been. I personally think undermining a local Bishop by sneaking your people into his Diocese is not all that orthodox. Faithful? To the Pope, I suppose, if this is what he wants them to do. 

I don't think that the prelature is as sweet as you believe.
I think we only have one example to go by and everything you said is pretty much not correct and there's no reason to think anything you outlined in your post would apply to SSPX as a Prelature. As far as Opus Dei specifically being "sweet" well, it doesn't attract me at all, but if you want to be a martinet with a lots of money and power and women servants to do the cleaning cooking and so forth, I guess it's a great deal. 

Remember, Opus Dei has a proven track record. It is very trusted and very respected.
No, it isn't. Unless you mean the Pope likes it and he's the only one who counts. And what I explained was the deal going in. Not at some point after they had been a Prelature for say, ten years. It was designed as I outlined. 

Canon Law certainly does not grant them that latitude. It is very brief.
Yes, we've all read it now. It's whatever the Pope says it is. 

It's easier to release than to reign in. Therefore, you begin with very narrow rules that allow the law giver room to operate, without giving the subordinate too many rights.
The Canons around Prelatures aren't narrow at all, they are vague, wide-open and tell us almost nothing. UT SIT tells us rather more, quite a lot, actually, but not as much as the whole Code. The Prelate was given plenty of rights and latitude to operate as he sees fit. Of course, the Pope could dissolve the whole thing at any time. At least, theoretically. The Pope, JP2 in this case, threw out the old Canon and replaced it and any Pope can change it anytime.

As things progress, if they progress in a positive direction, you give more slack. This has been the case with Opus Dei. But Opus Dei has a track record of several decades. I can't remember when it was founded.
They were not given more of anything as I already stated above. It was like this from the get-go. It was erected as a Prelature in 1982. 

As far as SSPX, the real question is: what does the Pope want to accomplish with the SSPX? A Pope makes a Prelature to perfom a task for him, to serve a specific purpose. What does the Pope want SSPX to do?


  1. You were kicked out for only a month?
    Mine`s "This change will be lifted: Never."
    Michael Francis and Eric Hilbert were my executioners.
    Bashed and bashed and bashed by Hilbert for being "rude" to
    much more rude anti-Catholics.
    Some of those "moderators" aren`t fit to be called that!!! If they
    can`t handle it, they shouldn`t be there!

  2. Sorry about that! So who were you on CAF? I a want to look up your posts so I can point and laugh... just kidding. You might like Theology Online forums. It's practically impossible to get banned there unless you say the F word. In fact, the owner gives recognition every month for the best put-down.