Tuesday, September 23, 2008

Opus Dei Bio Medical Science To Compete With Lay Version

Catholic Group Dogged By Controversy Seeks Salvation Through Science

On the outskirts of Rome, away from its ancient splendours and heaving piazzas, lies a gleaming new science facility dedicated to discovery, education and research.

Set in 30 hectares, the Biomedical University campus comprises a teaching hospital and university. It has 28 laboratories - a number set to increase - 18 operating theatres, a heliport and 400 beds. It will eventually employ up to 300 researchers and there is fierce competition over its degree courses. Last year, more than 1,200 people applied for 80 places to study medicine.

At the helm of this mission is Opus Dei - a global network of devout Catholics that has been the subject of negative publicity and mythology since its inception 80 years ago.

Clergy and lay people accuse the group of being secretive, controlling, misogynist and ultra-conservative in its theology. It also had ties with authoritarian regimes, with some members attaining seniority in Franco's government. (Maybe all of these aren't accusations, but truth.)

It shot to prominence in 2003 with the publication of The Da Vinci Code. Two characters were Opus Dei members, and both were sinister and devious, with one practising self-mortification, fuelling the idea that it was an extremist movement.

Given the group's perceived reputation, campus staff play down affiliations with the movement, insisting there is no obligation to be members of Opus Dei or even Catholic, although the staff are expected to adopt and respect its values. (Since secrecy is one of those values, I imagine this facility will be the epitome of academic freedom---NOT)

Paolo Maria Rossini, director for scientific activity, is not a member, although the president of the board and a former papal spokesman, Joaquin Navarro Valls, is.

Rossini said: "We don't hide ourselves under the thumb. We are Catholic by declaration. Stem cell research will never be done here. But nobody is going to check how many hours you spend in church." (I'm more concerned about the validity of the research, not how many hours researchers spend in church.)

Rossini's objective is to develop the research facility's capacity to rival secular scientific institutions, devoting enviable resources to neuroscience and oncology.
"When science is going very close to life and death we need good research to be able to compete with lay research," Rossini said. "The impact of science and medicine is a multi-faceted challenge and one of many frontiers the church has to face." (Science is value neutral. It's about repetitive scientific truth. It is not about competition between competing philosophies of truth. Good research is good research, period.)

His mission bears a Vatican blessing. Tarcisio Cardinal Bertone, secretary of state and the second most senior official in the Roman curia, inaugurated the campus this year.
He reminded assembled dignitaries of a key papal belief - that medical science must respect life - and told them: "Here you must transmit the gospel through your professional work, aided by modern technology.

"You have to make your voices heard in the world of science without renouncing the non-negotiable values of the human patrimony." (It sounds like Cardinal Bertone is confusing science with Vatican definitions of secularism.)

But Opus sceptics noted that Pope Benedict XVI did not attend the campus inauguration and interpreted his absence as a snub. There was also thinly disguised glee when the Vatican replaced Navarro Valls with a Jesuit priest as papal spokesman.

It was seen as a blow to the privileged status enjoyed by the group under the papacy of John Paul II, who was so captivated by Opus Dei's aims of sanctifying secular activities that he called them a "great ideal" and canonised the founder, Saint Josemaria Escriva, in a manner deemed unusually rapid by Vatican standards. (Some of us think JPII was enamored by something else entirely concerning Opus Dei--like their fascist and authoritarian theology and structure.)

The late pontiff's enthusiasm was a root cause for resentment and suspicion. Under Joseph Ratzinger this emotional connection has cooled. (This is one of the biggest reasons I'm developing a fondness for Benedict. He doesn't seemed to be all that thrilled with theocratic fascist organizations.)

The campus will help to fulfil Opus Dei's vision of creating a white-collar Catholic elite. Typically, members are intense, intelligent and highly motivated, said John Allen, from the National Catholic Reporter and author of a book on the movement. (I thought I just wrote something about caste systems. Maybe I'll have to write more.)

"There is an ethos of excellence that is part of the culture. If you buy into the philosophy that your everyday work is a service to God then you will do that work really well."

The group's ability to mould articulate, intelligent, successful individuals accounts for its profile and influence, which is disproportionate to its numbers yet allows it to punch above its weight.

Allen says the campus is also a way to inject a note of calm over Opus Dei by providing opportunities for positive encounters with members. "It has carved out a niche that appeals to people who want to live a serious religious life and have the same level of commitment as a priest or a nun. (I wonder if it's all that Opus Dei molding that precludes these people from becoming a priest or nun, and that allows them to subordinate their godly work to Opus Dei leadership.)

"It is about evangelising the profession, bringing a spiritual depth to work. They are interested in bringing a Christian approach to law, politics, architecture, so it's no surprise they're doing it with this campus." (It isn't about Christian, it's about Opus Dei theology and philosophy, so it is no surprise they are doing it with an Opus Dei bio medical research facility.)

But one former member, Monsignor Vladimir Felzmann, believes that Opus Dei has a covert agenda to its activities. He was a member for 22 years, joining in 1969, and was one of those closest to its founder. The group's overall aim is to recruit, he said. (Recruit for what and for whom. Can't be Jesus. He wasn't into forming an 'elite' group of white collar intelligentsia.)

"Covertly it's to have something to which you attract leading scientists and persuade them to join. But it's hard to know who belongs and who doesn't because they're encouraged not to tell you. You don't know what they're up to." (Guess what Father, you're not supposed to.)

Former members seek out Felzmann, a priest in the London diocese of Westminster, for pastoral care. He concedes that Opus Dei contributes positively in the fields of education and healthcare, yet remains concerned by its impact on individuals who break away.

"When you meet people who, as a result of Opus Dei, give up religion and don't want funeral prayers to be said, then that matters." (Not to Opus Dei. These apostate people are no longer 'elite'. They are self made failures.)

He said he was saddened, rather than bitter, about the group. "When Christianity and fascism embrace you get Opus Dei. It was born in a time of fascism. They don't teach respect and love for others." (BINGO.)

But Opus Dei continues to grow. Success in Spain, Italy and Latin America has emboldened it to embrace Russia, Kazakhstan, South Korea and Vietnam.

Such ambition is not cheap - the campus cost around €30m (£23.5m) - and Opus Dei receives funding from the European Union and the Italian state for some initiatives. It also has benefactors, sometimes non-members, who finance activities. One Jesuit priest argues the group is "putting its money where its mouth is" by wanting to excel in morally acceptable areas.

Father John Paris, Walsh Professor of Bioethics at Boston College, said: "They want to be leaders. They would love to win the Nobel prize. If you're working in cancer research and can choose where to go, you'll go to the best.

"Opus Dei is committed to having an impact on those they think will be influential and successful. Why do people go to Yale or Harvard? Build a bigger mousetrap and better people will come. They want to play with the big boys." (I wonder if this was intentional on Father Paris's part, or just a Freudian slip. Mouse trap indeed.)


As one can see from my multiple comments with in the article, this piece just lends itself to commentary. I can't help but wonder just why Opus Dei and their benefactors felt the need to build their own bio medical research facility. It's not like there aren't plenty of other Catholic research hospitals and teaching facilities. Places like St. Jude's Children's Hospital in Tennessee already have a formidable reputation for the quality of their care and their research.

However, if the numbers of applications for admission are any indication, it does appear as if Biomedical University Campus has an inbuilt reason for existence. I guess I can't be too surprised about this development, given that the Jesuits have been running their own universities for centuries. I guess starting your own system of higher education is one way to tell if a recent apostolic group has made the big time. The Legionaires certainly do this, as do any number of other recently founded religious groups.

A biomedical research facility might be a horse of a different color though. I couldn't help but notice that the specialties will be neuroscience and oncology. Recent break throughs in neuroscience are probably especially troubling to the Vatican, especially quantum neurophysiology.
Some of the research is indicating that our brains are capable of connecting with a larger number of information streams than previously thought. This has the potential to call into question a few pet ideas concerning the supernatural and our place in the creation of the universe, and all of this has serious repercussions for the traditional Catholic world view. I kind of wonder if in some secret isolated lab somewhere on campus there won't be some Catholic values laden research designed to debunk quantum neurophysics.

In any case, more power to Opus Dei in their attempt to defend the universal truths of Catholicism as they pertain to the biomedical field. I just hope they don't think they are pursuing a neutral scientific path because they won't be. I also hope that the ever so obedient researchers and their work aren't used for some other purpose besides 'competing with lay research'.

I know some readers--especially with that previous sentence---are going to wonder if I haven't gone off the paranoid scale, but until Opus Dei gets far more transparent, I just can't help wondering.


  1. This comment has been removed by the author.

  2. When it comes to Opus Dei, I dont think there is such a thing as being too paranoid. Perhaps it is my jaded nature, but I do not trust any organization with that much power, that much covert influence and that much secrecy. I continue to have doubts about their real motives. Perhaps there was more truth in the Da Vinci code than we realize.

    It is interesting how closely current events seem to be in parallel with recent literary works that deal with the antichrist. Interesting that all of this is surfacing now, at the same time that there is so much progress and understanding being made into the true nature of who we really are and the real power that we all have within us.

    Sometimes it seems like a war is being waged by the conservative fundamentalist groups against those who are committed to bringing the real truth of divine love into greater expression.

    Recent events could be interpreted as battle lines being drawn by the groups that espouse a philosophy of hate against those who are working to bring divine love into greater expression.

    There is an axiom I was taught early in my ministerial training that states that the more we allow the Light to shine in us and through us, the more darkness that will be illuminated. As we move closer to the light within us, the darkness within is easier to see. That is true on a personal level, and certainly seems to be the case now on a global level.

    Shifting thoughts to cancer. I have always thought that cancer was a spiritual condition, not a medical condition. A condition that resulted from long term repressed fear and hatred that was unresolved. A recent AP article stated that we are no nearer a medical cure for cancer than we were 40 years ago. In a different article, there was reference to the success of alternative methods of cancer treatment. Interesting thing, the successful methods all have forgiveness work as part of the program.

    Wouldnt it be an interesting development if it was proven that the way to prevent and cure cancer was something as mundane as forgiveness and acceptance?

  3. Carl, it's funny you should mention your theory about cancer.
    In most of the cases I have worked with where there was spontaneous remission it's been with young children, but that only happened after the dominant parent went through some sort of personal conversion, usually over a guilt or fear issue---most of the time it's not something they are even consciously aware of.

    In adult cures, it's always over a guilt or fear issue and once that is resolved, the cancer will go into remisssion. I suspect the reason there is no cure for cancer is because the etiology is in the mind and the cancer in the body is the expression for the mind.

    There are of course other reasons for cancer, like environmental carcinogens. The interesting thing for me is that I truly think instantaneous cures are evidence of our ability to change our DNA.
    Basically DNA is reset to a time in which the disease was not present and viola you observe an instant cure.

    Following these lines of research is probably not going to be happening in Opus Dei's research facilities, but I think this line of research holds out great promise. We should be training more Padre Pio's, not more oncologists.

  4. Interesting article, Colleen--and your comments are right on target, in my book. Why, indeed, set up an alternative center to study science? Unless you want to invent some alternative science?

    I'm taken with what you say about light and darkness, Carl. The more the light shines, the more the darkness is also made evident.

    That helps me understand why some of the battles in the religio-cultural war are so fierce right now. When darkness is in danger of getting exposed, it tries to put out the light that's exposing it.

  5. I can relate to what you are both saying Carl and Colleen. Carl, the battle lines are being drawn. People, like Rev Hagee or Opus Dei in the extreme, read into a mistaken reality (that is falsely supported by mistranslation of "The Word") and they shape their views and reality from that superficial understanding, at the gut level. Interesting that McCain's campaign is run from the gut level and not the head. That would explain the biomedical science, science of the gut, completely overshadowing the science of the spiritual mind - thoughts that can cause living cells to invade healthy cells and destroy them in the process or thoughts that heal like Jesus. The political process seems to mirror the same sort of cancer that takes over the healthy and destroys it. The microcosmic becomes macrocosmic?

    I know of a charismatic priest who has preached about forgiveness as a way to healing oneself and aiding in the recovery and healing of others by forgiving them. His political views are another matter and it doesn't seem he's made that jump or leap in connecting the dots that political or religious views from the gut (the Magisterium) are not necessarily the right ones, or healthy ones. In the political & religious sphere there is a lot of forgiving that needs to be done in order for us all to heal.

    Cancer is like an internal Armageddon. The political cancer is from the thoughts, to words, to actions that might create circumstances favorable for Armageddon.

    I see this Opus Dei group as dangerous because they are secretive and because of their history. This biomedical research place they have opened says they seem to have utter contempt for secular institutions and it will be a recruiting place no doubt. By insisting on their own research "their way" they believe maybe they will find a cure. Maybe they think the secular institutions have been hiding the cure in secret somewhere and they are going to unveil the secrecy to the world. But, as you have said Carl and Colleen, cancer is probably a spiritual condition. If only the Church would concentrate on the spiritual dynamics at play in their role as Jesus taught for them to be real healers. Spreading fear, guilt, shame and a lot of other negative energy will only reap negative energy.

    I think when Jesus said "Feed my sheep" that He was talking about spiritual food and that is from thoughts, to words, to actions that contain the truth of Jesus which is that He taught His disciples how to heal others. To heal would be loving, Christ-like.

    That brings me to the thought about hatred for others and self-loathing which could cause cancer or wars. In order to heal from the cancer one would have to admit to the hatred or self-hatred. If one hates themself without knowing it they would need a specialist to identify it. The oncologist treats the effect not the cause.

    I am in total agreement with you Colleen that "We should be training more Padre Pio's, not more oncologists." Amen.

  6. Butterfly, the interesting thing about what you've written is the part where you say "If one hates themselves without knowing it they would need a specialist to identify it."

    In all the hoopla over Padre Pio I think people miss out on the fact that he 'read' souls. He knew what the root cause for the guilt and self hate was, and because he was a priest, in the sacrament of confession he was able to trigger the self forgiveness mechanism. In other words, he had the sacramental 'magic' which people truly believed forgave them their sins and released them from the emotion attached to the root core event. Once a person reaches that state, their is no more need for the disease, and it disappears.

    I still think that if we did before and after studies of the individual's DNA we would see the change mirrored in the DNA. Changing the DNA is responsible for the change in the physical manifestation, changing the emotional energy is responsible for the change in the DNA. In one sense it's about returning the body, mind, and emotional state to it's original intention. My Native buddies would describe this as closing the circle and returning to the starting point.

    In reality, the healing is accomplished by the individual's own Divinely underpinned life processes, and the healer only serves as the catalyst. The Divine then is inseparable from the process, not out there somewhere deciding who gets healing and who doesn't.

  7. I believe there are different types of healers and Padre Pio is one example. Another might be Thomas Merton. If I had not read his writings I would not have found my own voice which had been repressed and suppressed by culture, family, and Church.