CHAPTER
II
THE HIDDEN LIFE OF
ESCRIVÁ DE
BALAGUER
7. Escrivá and the Seven Deadly
Sins
The first capital sin is pride, that excessive pride which leads to an
excess of false magnificence and unnecessary pomp. It is a scornful
haughtiness with large doses
of arrogance.
Escrivá de Balaguer was arrogant by birth and without scruples.
His arrogance was in his blood and in his guts. Thus, when the Count of
Barcelona, Don Juan de Borbón, father of the King of
Spain at the time of this writing, visited Escrivá de Balaguer
in his Roman residence, the
founder of Opus Dei accompanied him, as he used to do with illustrious
visitors, to tour the house. "When
the retinue entered the splendid basilica, Escrivá approached
the carved wooden choir and, sitting in the armchair reserved for him,
which seems somewhat more prominent than the others, began to explain
to
Don Juan de Borbón that he sat there every day and spoke to God
in this way: - Lord, Josemaría has done a lot for the Church."
(120) The scene
reminds one of a staged parable from the Gospels.
His vanity and pride led him, on the day of his mother's death, to call
the Civil Governor of Lerida on April 22, 1941, by his first name:
- Hey, Juan Antonio, my mother has
died. How can I get to Madrid as soon as possible?
The response was:
- I am sending my car now with the driver. (121)
His mother's remains rest in the crypt of the oratory of Santa
María de la Paz, in the central house of Opus Dei, in Diego de
León Street in Madrid, together with José María's
brothers, since the members of the Escrivá family should not mix
their mortal remains with those lying in the municipal cemeteries. In
the
special and privileged crypt, regal oil
paintings with aristocratic airs, are depicted not only the "Father",
but
also his ancestors, "authentic
displays of greatness for a family of simple origin". (122) What is all this?
Should we continue to call it poverty? Humility? It is outright
haughtiness!
Even when he was appointed Prelate of the Work, he wanted it for life,
a truly exceptional circumstance in the institutions of the Church
where only the Jesuit Superior General,
enjoys such a
privilege.
As the Spanish Nobel Laureate in Literature, Camilo José Cela,
says, "the very name of the society,
Opus Dei, already contains too much pride: Work of God, thus, with a
capital letter, is a star that shines in the firmament, or a sunset, or
a bird that flies, or a beautiful woman. But a society made by men,
however noble its ends, is not God's work, but man's; let us remember
about the
free will". (123)
Of course, the proud Escrivá did not hesitate to say: "I have known several popes, you all know
a lot of bishops, but only one founder, and God will ask you to give an
account of having lived in the 'Father's' time", such were the
words of the Monsignor in the course of a meditation addressed to a
group of his "children" in London in 1962. The argument was repeated in
private: "Look, Alvaro. I have known
bishops as sheep, cardinals by the dozen, half a dozen popes... but
there is only one founder of Opus Dei. And that's me". (124) It was pride
personified.
As an old adept of the Work said: "I
don't think it is possible that the
holiness of the Bishop can be based precisely on simplicity or
humility". By way of example, there were several Monsignors in
the Work;
this is an honorary title that is very common in the Roman Curia; among
them were Alvaro del Portillo - later to become bishop - Salvador
Canals and several others. But this fact was ignored until Monsignor
Escrivá died. As he lived, he alone was to be spoken of. Nor in
the Work, no priest is a "Father", only Monsignor Escrivá is.
It is also symptomatic that Monsignor Escrivá never attended the
funerals of any cardinal or any other person during his many years in
Rome. "He only receives at home",
it was often argued. (125)
His false modesty is reflected in the following anecdote when a priest
from Navarre, Father Iribarren, who was visiting him around the year
1935 at
Ferraz's residence, tells how much it cost him to received by
Escrivá. "He had to announce
himself several times,
and finally, seeing that he was not leaving, he said to the boy who
opened the door: 'Tell him that there is a priest here who will not
leave without seeing him'. Finally Don Josemaría came out
and
embraced him, saying, "Man, I'm so sorry! They put up a wall, they
won't let me leave." (126)
The wall was himself.
Therefore, before leaving for Rome, where he would reside from
1946 on, he told his closest friends: "Come
and talk to me," he said, "and take advantage of this, because in a
short time you will not be able to do so, because we will be installing
a large mansion in Rome itself, next to the Vatican, from where we will
govern the world, all with the money of each state and in the official
buildings from each of them, because their governors themselves will
ask
us to do so. Take advantage of it now." (127)
He, himself,
liked to repeat that "the
grace of God accompanied him", (128) a theologically
arrogant statement. Perhaps that is why he began to monopolize titles
and distinctions. One day he will be everything at once: priest,
doctor, bishop, prelate, marquis, eager for gifts, honors and
decorations, perhaps to be able to attach them all to his cassock. Many
members of the Work have not yet been able to recover from the negative
effects of the "affair" of the marquisette. "A man of all spirituality, (129) who denies pomp and vanity, how can he, in
the second half of the 20th century, seek the tinsel of a title of
nobility?" Of course, what is kept very quiet and silenced
within the Work
is that on April 22, 1947, after giving a large sum of money as alms
for pontifical works, Escrivá was named "domestic prelate of His
Holiness," an honorary position that gave him the right to the title of
Monsignor (130)
, that is, a new form of simony. Escrivá bought his title of
Monsignor
On the other hand, his secretary Antonio Pérez informs us that: "Father Escrivá did not usually go
to meetings in which it was not clear beforehand that he was going to
be the most important person. That's why he went to so few of them. But
one
afternoon, Ruiz Giménez invited him to a reception at the
Spanish
Embassy and when he arrived, he was greeted with a 'How are you, Father
Escrivá?' Escrivá turned around and left. Then Alvaro
del Portillo explained that this was not the way to treat him. Ruiz
Giménez could have called him Monsignor
Escrivá, but not 'Father Escrivá'." (131)
His vanity was
augmented by the sight of many of his "children"
climbing in the world, and this "became
a
component of his growing megalomania"... He only had time for
the important ones. "A kiss for you,
for being general manager; for you, two, for being undersecretary"
he said to González Valdés and García
Moncó, high officials of the Ministry of Commerce at the time.
This went so far that Escrivá imposed, (132) as an added ritual to
the internal liturgy about the "Father", enriched at the General
Congress
of
Opus Dei in 1956, the knee-kneeling that was to be given in his
presence. Escrivá demanded that genuflection be made before him,
a reverence that in the Church is practiced only before the Pope and
that set a precedent in the Catholic Church where no hero or saint of
the Holy Roman Catholic Church has ever demanded such an act of
prostration.
Even "the Father now tells them that
the day the history of the Work
is written it will be done kneeling". (133) The Roman
ecclesiastical world, with its intrigues and arrogance, deeply
impressed Escrivá, who assured his children that they should
have faith in the Church "in spite
of its errors".
Such was his pride that Moncada tells us that "Lucho Sánchez
Moreno, a Peruvian numerary who had worked with me in the general
secretariat and who turned out to be the first bishop of Opus Dei, when
I saw him I went over to greet him and very sincerely kissed his
pastoral ring. That made Father Moreno very unhappy because at home one
only kisses Father's hand". (134)
That honorary
distinction coincides with the exacerbation of
Escrivá's personality cult. Escrivá granted himself the
title of Grand
Chancellor, the traditional title of higher ecclesiastical
education at
the University of Navarre in 1960, a circumstance that he revalidated
with the same appointment at the University of Piura in Peru, although
as the magazine Area Crítica, linked to the Work, tells us,
"Escrivá de Balaguer was the
opposite of what a popular leader should be - clumsy in his
words, with no great things to say and
with the cheap banalities of a town priest; all his public actions were
based
on the artificial cult of personality" (135) or as his own
secretary portrays him when he says (136) that "the external
appearance coincided with the well-known weakening of
Escrivá's mental lucidity, already embarked on a megalomania
fomented by his faithful, whose most unfortunate public episode could
be the obtaining of a marquisette for the "Father", that of Peralta".
Jesuit Walsh points out that whatever was the justification, asking for
the
restoration or attainment of a noble title seemed unsuitable for
someone whose humility is among the virtues listed by his supporters,
while the cause of canonization is in progress. Especially in the light
of the maxim 677 of his spiritual treatise The Way: "Honors, distinctions, titles: things of
air, puffs of pride, lies, nothingness."
It is also somewhat strange, in the light of that maxim, to have also
gathered a number of other Spanish decorations, such as the Grand Cross
of St. Raymond of Peñafort, the Grand Cross of Alfonso X the
Wise, the Grand Cross of Isabella the Catholic, and others, as well as
various gold medals.
He was not only arrogant and haughty, but flattering and demagogic, a
master in
seeking strokes of effect as on the occasion when he would say: "When I
die...!" and the crowd, seeing themselves in the throes of
losing the
one who was their support and sustainment, launched a tremendous
outcry:
- Nooooo! "When I die" -
repeated the "Father" before the sobbing crowd
that listened to him - "I will have
my heart torn out and buried on the
campus of this university". (137)
Arrogant and haughty as it is evidenced (138) at the time father
Arrupe
assumed the responsibilities of the general office of the Society of
Jesus, who wrote a letter to each of the pre-posts of the religious
orders and congregations and secular institutes announcing his
intention to visit them personally. This was a sign of the fraternal
spirit that father Arrupe brought to the Society. The priests were
unanimous in answering that it was not the Jesuit general who should
visit them, but they themselves were called to go humbly to the Jesuit
general. "Do not come to us. It is
we who are coming to you."
In this Vatican style
courtesy, the desire of all to inaugurate a new stage in
the history of relations between orders and congregations was made
clear. But there was one exception: the Prelate General of Opus Dei,
Don Josemaría Escrivá, did not reply, so it is said, to
father Arrupe's letter. The dynamic Jesuit did not hesitate, and his
humility and new disposition were not so temporary that they could not
withstand this trial. He personally telephoned Bruno Buozzi 73, the
sumptuous residence of Monsignor Escrivá in Rome. Reliable
sources report that father Arrupe called Escrivá up to five
times
and all five times he was told that "Father" was not at home.
Nor is it the custom of "the Father" to answer letters, much less those
addressed by "his children".
The journalist Luis Carandell asked to be received in audience by
Escrivá. He received the reponse through Ayesta in Madrid that
"Monsignor Escrivá did not
judge that his person was important
enough to be the object of special attention. Nevertheless, when the
time came, I would be very happy to receive him". When Ayesta
was asked
about the prudent time frame in which the interview could take place,
he told Carandell that in about "three
years" adding the phrase "there
are sixty journalists waiting in front of you; many of them foreigners".
Neither the interview nor the hearing would ever be granted.
Although
his
theological formation was - according to his fellow
students - that of a mediocre diocesan seminary student, he liked to
say "I am as learned about the
Church as the Pope", in the context of
an excessive and crazy ambition.
For him, only the best was good enough. His private chapel was opulent
and his fence of inaccessibility was "part
of the game, part of the
myth that was carefully and consciously being built around him".
(139) He was an
important
and busy man, who projected an image of vanity and of inner and outer
emptiness, only covered by his syndrome of arrogance and haughtiness
as if he wanted to
permanently hide an ill disguised inferiority complex and resentment.
His knowledge of law and theology was scarce and childish - something
which did not
prevent him from being, attracted by his arrogance, a member of the
Pontifical Academy of Theology and Consultant to the Sacred
Congregation of Seminaries and Universities, a member of the Pontifical
Commission for the Authentic Interpretation of Canon Law, and, of the
Universities of Opus Dei, as we have already pointed out, Great
Chancellor. He was of the opinion that money can do everything, as a
powerful knight could, because everything has, in Escrivá's
mind,
its price and its level of resistance.
He had a taste for greatness that made him forget his own miseries. His
passion for ostentation contrasts with his protestations of humility.
During his lifetime he decided, and enforced, that every time he
arrived
in Spain, all of Franco's ministers who belonged to the Work would go
to receive and greet him, together with the authorities of the Work. It
was a pleasure
that flattered his boasting.
If Escrivá was on the one hand a proud stubborn man, he was also
possessed by greed, by a disorderly desire to possess and acquire
wealth in order to treasure it. He was a great materialist, avaricious,
and insatiable. And everyone knows this when they see the properties of
Opus Dei, even if they try to camouflage them through intermediaries,
through selected trustees. Escrivá wanted to have control over
everything, the more he possessed, the better.
This disguise of ownership was evident from his early days when
he
opened the DYA Academy in 1928 - "officially
an abbreviation of 'Law
and Architecture' (Derecho y Arquitectura), the founder's favorite
subjects, and in reality
'God and Boldness' (Dios y Audacia) in the secret language of the
members of the Work -
it was already legally registered in the names of second, third and
fourth persons. No one could legally say that that school of future
leaders of the Organization was the property of Escrivá."
(140)
If for him he wanted it all, for the others his advice was to "keep
them short of money, and let them learn to use it, even though he would
clarify that - it is better to manage it when they earn it", (141) the quote is taken
from his official biographer.
His determination to earn money led him at a very young age, when he
arrived as a priest in the capital of Spain, to become a "spiritual
advisor to ladies of the lineage". (142) Later on,
Torreciudad's
budget was estimated at two billion pesetas...
He did not want to waste any occasion nor opportunity, so when
Generalissimo Franco
took over the education and training of the then Prince Juan Carlos,
Escrivá was attentive to this and managed to participate, from
the very beginning, in the educational environment of the little prince
in order to get the best deal in the future.
"In the summer of '47"
- says Antonio Pérez -
"I was in Molinoviejo, the Work's exercise
house, near Segovia. One afternoon Carrero Blanco appeared there and
was received by 'Father', and, a little later, Eugenio Vegas
Latapié
arrived, accompanied by Rafael Calvo Serer. At that time I knew nothing
of what was going on, although Eugenio Vegas, who had been a lawyer for
the Council of State, on learning that I was also a lawyer, began to
talk to me. Later I learned that this was the first meeting between
representatives of Don Juan Carlos and Franco about the Prince's
education."
Escrivá was in favor of
Don Juan Carlos de Borbón, whom
he had the opportunity to interact with in Rome, reigning in
Spain after Franco. The
Prince's team of educators included a number of numeraries, including
Angel López Amo, who would die in an accident in the United
States in 1957, and Federico Suárez. (143)
Speaking of "those of the Opus",
the writer Francisco Umbral (144)
published an article
in the daily press in which he reflected that "one finds it difficult
to believe that Monsignor Escrivá was capable of planning all
this, given the wild and aggressive nature of his apostolate. Calvo
Serer's 'Madrid' practices an anti-Francoism that comes we do not know
from where and
in the name of what. Opus Dei has returned to its roots, where it
should never have left: the monetarist apostolate. And a lot of valium
for the dissidents. The (architecturally unacceptable) Basilica of Opus
Dei that is being built today in Barbastro is Escriva's response to the
humiliations he suffered in his town."
It should not be forgotten that, although in his early days in Madrid,
he
chose Jesuits as his spiritual directors, he would later turn against
them, considering them an obstacle in his career towards greed.
Escrivá then began to develop a mentality that the end justifies
the means and he preached over and over again that almsgiving covers
the multitude of sins (145),
encouraging members to give continuous alms. For this reason the Roman
College was organized, in which titles of cooperator were issued to
those who gave money and in which all the administrative machinery of
the Work was put at the service of the collection.
Miguel Fisac (146)
recalls that he collaborated with Alvaro del Portillo in the operation
to buy the mansion of Bruno Buozzi. And then he made the sketches for
the extension of the rear service area of the palace. But he clashed
with the ideas and architectural impositions of "Father"
Escrivá:
lavish decorations, with marbles and luxurious ornamentation.
It was known to all that Escrivá himself, in order to make
profits and amass money, encouraged the traffic of influence,
commissioning specific arrangements to merchant friends who were then
promised contacts in the ministries carried out by people from the
Work. (147)
Escrivá
had raised the golden calf to the altar. He worshipped
it as Aaron, the brother of Moses, wanted to be the high priest where
opulence and wealth were the supreme values.
He created the habit of the "obolus
to the 'Father'" as once was that of
St. Peter. "The theme of gifts to
the 'Father' became obsessive." - says
Antonio Pérez, Escrivá's secretary - "It was becoming
fashionable that each visit of a Council member to Rome meant the
obligation of an obol to the 'Father' in the form of money or important
gifts".
"When the Great Cross of St. Raymond
of Penyafort was obtained for
'Father' - at his request - I, on the first trip I made, brought him a
normal one, made of gold plated silver and enamel, which was received
almost as an offense. Shortly afterwards I learned that Alvaro had
ordered another one with diamonds." (148) The cult of Mammon was
one of the
characteristic profiles of Escriva's personality.
According to Yvon Le Vaillant, perhaps he did not want only the
Marquisette of
Peralta out of a simple concern for noble glory, but "it is not so much
nobility but the treasure and the possession of an international
network of
infiltration". (149)
Once again the treasury emerges in Monsignor's fibers.
'The Way', which pretends to
be in a most traditional religious line, tends to form bourgeoisie that
seeks to influence the
world through material success. (150)
He presents at the same time a Christianity of the Crusades, typically
Spanish, and an effective Christianity adapted to the business
bourgeoisie.
He sought money, wealth and
power by all the financial means at his
disposal, including politics, a secondary but indispensable objective
for the former, financial hegemony, although, cynically and
self-righteously, he said in an interview that "if Opus Dei ever
interfered in politics, the first enemy of the Work would be me",
and he would, if the Work would indeed be the authentic and genuine
work of God, instead of what it really is.
That is the same hypocrisy with which today Monsignor
Josemaría Escrivá de Balaguer y Albás, Marquis of
Peralta, was to be declared officially a saint by the Church "on the basis
of his many virtues, among them his poverty and humility". (151)
What a laughable joke!
Escrivá boasted with some of his men of knowing well the
labyrinthine twists and turns of the Vatican's corridors and rooms, and
"boasted of having made some
bureaucratic tricks for the benefit of
his plans. Pius XII's last signature was literally obtained on his
deathbed. It seems that even the original document preserves the traces
of that circumstance." (152)
No wonder, since the teaching of Monsignor was that "we have to be
rogues and, in addition, bold".
The journalist Mario Rodriguez Aragon declared (153) that "he did not
believe in the poverty of those who live in opulence, nor in the
apostolate
of those who are going to conquer material goods", referring to
Escrivá
and his Work.
Of course, the anthology of the nonsense was pronounced by the miserly
Escrivá when he said without blushing: "the wealth of Opus Dei is its
poverty". (154)
We have already alluded to lust when referring to the carnal and
lustful sense of the Founder of Opus Dei. He was lustful because of
that unrestrained and unrepressed desire for forbidden carnal delights.
"I use Atkinsons, the English
cologne... smell, smell", (155)
he would sometimes
hiss at some of the members of his inner circle. Dr. Donato Fuejo Lago,
a heart and lung specialist from Madrid, was of the opinion (156) that Escrivá "and all
his visible actions seem to me to be corny and ridiculous, and there is
nothing that produces more repulsion in me than cornyness".
In his youth, Monsignor was
conceited and worldly, and according to
Father Hugo, a contemporary of his seminary days, he always marched "a
little bit apart from the line" as if he did not want to be
confused
with the others. For Don Luis Borraz, the vicar general of the diocese,
he was a "little vain".
For another colleague, he was "very
conceited", even as a seminarian, "he always wore his bonnet at an
angle".
Jesuit Father Llanos (157)
was invited to Rome to visit the magnificent villa where Monsignor
Escrivá lived. He was shown into a room and after a brief wait
the founder of Opus Dei appeared at the door with his arms outstretched
in a holy gesture. Llanos no doubt thought that Escrivá was
going to embrace him, but here comes the significance of the
episode - what would not be his surprise when the Prelate General of
Opus
Dei came forward to him with a lively pace and prostrating himself on
the Jesuit's floor began to mumble in a voice of deep emotion: "I'm a
sinner! I'm a sinner! Father Llanos, I am a sinner!"
He was not a lover of classical music; on the contrary, he delighted in
Conchita Piquer's couplets.
His fondness for the "handsome young men", for effeminate refinement
and for concupiscence, are no secret to anyone, although they are kept
jealously guarded. For Vladimir Felzmann, an Englishman of Czech origin
and a member of the Work since 1952 who became a priest, (158) "the founder... could
be hard as ice and tender as a mother".
There are many anecdotes, episodes, and scenes about the anger that
Escrivá exhibited. At times he behaved as if the
fury of the elements had been unleashed, with indignation and anger,
over banal and unimportant things. His character sometimes turned sour
and entered into angry phases, into "biblical" irritations.
He had the traits of "ingenuity and
violence of character typical of an
Aragonite". (159)
His own secretary, Antonio Perez, tells us that "the 'Father', in the
presence of young boys of the Work, gave me a great scolding, as if I
were to blame for Montini's election. Deep down, he took out his
frustration on me and turned Montini green, accusing him of being a
Mason and other 'niceties'. He was very excited and warned that all
those
who had cooperated in that election would be condemned to hell."
(160)
For an old
numerary (161)
"this way of being and acting in the
Work is the consequence of
the 'Father's' anger and of his energetic reprimands. Some of us have
experienced them and others have spoken to us so that we could learn
more".
A close collaborator (162)
reminds us that he was "impressed by
the violence with which
Escrivá abhorred - in my presence - a secularized priest who had
occupied a directive position in the Work: 'I have already sent him,
through a notary, two notices of
excommunication!'" One could say that he is
charming,
pleasant and persuasive when one is in his favor and intolerant,
intractable and rude (163)
when his criteria are not accepted.
When he had to reprimand someone he "did it with energy". (164) His temper would turn
sour in such trances, his outbursts of anger would become more
frequent, and the people around him, even the closest and most loyal,
would have more than one bad experience in such throws. (165) It was unbearable...
He had what is usually called "sudden
and violent anger (166)
in which Monsignor
lost his temper and began to shout". When he was angry, he used
to say:
"For anyone who leaves Opus Dei, I do
not give ten cents for his soul".
He called an associate (167)
who had been in the Institute for a long time carrying out missions of
some importance, and who later left, and, according to her, he scolded
her harshly saying: "The Magdalene
was a sinner but you are a
corrupter!" and he threatened her saying that "if anything leaks out of
what you have seen in the Work, I will have an editorial published
against you in all the newspapers of the world."
The Monsignor's anger is sacred. On one occasion (168) "Father"
Escrivá
attended a lunch with six or eight personalities - highly
representatives
of the Spanish Catholic movements. At one point there was a minor
discussion between the Monsignor and some of the guests. "Father"
became
more and more heated and when it was proven that he was the one who was
right in the dispute, he looked at his opponent and, in a gesture that
must be considered unprecedented, he stuck out his tongue, leaving the
diners mute with astonishment and desolation.
After Escrivá's epileptic rages, he used other means against his
opponents and had a "habitual system
of defamation". (169)
The picture of his sharp personality would remain incomplete without
speaking of his gluttony, of that lack of restraint in eating and
drinking,
of that exaggerated appetite for the delicacies of taste - that is, for
that
overt gluttony.
He was exquisite. "The 'Father' used
to drink the water of Solares, but
after the word of the fraud that was spread over said water, wherever
the
'Father' went they took for him French mineral water, which
definitely replaced the previous one. For him and for the houses he
visits" - continues the testimony of the associate (170) - "a whole team of
specialized persons is transferred each time to serve him and him alone
(dining room, kitchen, ironing, cleaning, etc.). I had to consider a
mattress for 'Father' as useless; a mattress which was bought expressly
for him brand new, because it was three centimeters too wide and had to
be
replaced by a new one. Melons have been sent to America by plane
expressly for the 'Father', because the 'Father' likes them and there
are
no melons there."
Apparently he was austere at meals "although
he managed to hide that
austerity when we had guests". (171)
His diabetic diet made him suffer because he loved to eat and drink
well. (172) In
the houses where he went, they were extremely attentive to his needs.
There was always fruit available. There were many oranges, even if it
was not their
season, in case the "Father" asked for a juice, dozens of boxes of
chocolates in case he wanted one, boxes of wine "which if you are
discreet and tricky, you will serve it to me in a jug". Domestic
perfectionism had to reach its maximum with "Father", who at times
displayed his anger as the result of what he deemed poor service. On
one occasion he asked for the seventh omelet
because the previous six were not to his liking.
María del Carmen Tapia commented that everything Escrivá
ate, and from where he ate it, had to be of great quality. The dishes
were of the
best porcelain, the silverware was of the best quality. (173) According to an
archbishop who was taken there to eat in 1965, during the last session
of the Vatican Council, the dishes were gold-plated. The archbishop
(although he was then only a bishop and newly consecrated) was a man of
considerable social conscience. It was impossible for him to reconcile
the golden plates with the Christian life he expected from a man of
such distinction in the Church. It was also impossible for him to eat
those exquisitely prepared and perfectly served foods.
In public he did not taste the liquors but "he referred to himself
saying that, for a good founder (brand name of a liquor
'Fundador'), the one who came in a
bottle". The meaning of
this
phrase was twisted by his biographer as if Escrivá said it
because he
considered himself a "founder without foundation". (174) In reality,
Escrivá was making reference the Spanish brandy Fundador (which translates to
"Founder").
The envy was a consequence of his greed and predatory spirit. He
desired
everything and coveted the things of others, of his fellow men.
As for his laziness, it was mental. "Very
rarely had Josemaría
Escrivá agreed to speak through the press", wrote his
friend
Julián Cortés Cavanillas. (175) Nor did he appear in
public, and almost always exclusively before members of the Work or
known sympathizers, and not more than on very few occasions. The
repertoire of
questions in the gatherings he attended and the meetings that were so
few in number were rehearsed, and he knew in advance what he was going
to be asked, and how and in what way. He liked to go unnoticed
according to his life's motto: "Hiding
and disappearing is my thing". (176)
Although his motto was that "work
will make you holy", which reminds us
of that frontispiece of the German concentration camps: "work will make
you free", he enjoyed the work of others more than his own, what
he
really enjoyed was that people worked tirelessly for him with
discipline, submission and obedience, as a new formula of slavery,
through his instrument of God's Work.
REFERENCES
120. Carandell, p 103.
121. Bernal, p 36.
122. Ibid.
123. Jardiel Poncela, op cit, p 65.
124. Vicente Gracia, p 11.
125. Moreno, "El Opus Dei, anexo a una historia" ("Opus Dei, Annex to a
History"), p. 20.
126. Carandell, p 26.
127. Moreno, "La otra cara del Opus Dei" ("The Other Face of Opus
Dei"), p 36.
128. Le Vaillant, p 9.
129. Moncada, "El Opus Dei: Una interpretación" ("Opus Dei: An
Interpretation"), pp 126-127.
130. Ynfante, "La prodigiosa aventura del Opus Dei" ("The Prodigious
Adventure of Opus Dei"), p 30.
131. Moncada, "Historia oral del Opus Dei" ("Oral History of Opus
Dei"), p. 63.
132. Ibid, p 72.
133. Vincent Gracia, p. 198.
134. Moncada, "Historia oral del Opus Dei" ("Oral History of Opus
Dei"), p. 29.
135. "Area Crítica", op cit.
136. Antonio Pérez, quoted in Moncada, "Historia oral del Opus
Dei" ("Oral History of Opus Dei"), p 85.
137. Carandell, p. 106.
138. Ibid, pp 17-18.
139. Walsh, p. 210.
140. "Tiempo" magazine (July 7, 1986).
141. Bernal, p. 49.
142. García Romanillos, op cit.
143. Moncada, "Historia oral del Opus Dei" ("Oral History of Opus
Dei"), p. 65.
144. Francisco Umbral, "Los del Opus Dei", El Pais newspaper (January
20, 1986).
145. Moncada, "Historia oral del Opus Dei" ("Oral History of Opus
Dei"), p. 37.
146. Ibid.
147. Ibid., p. 53.
148. Ibid, pp 53-54.
149. Le Vaillant, p. 254
150. Wast, Jesuits, "Opus Dei y Cursillos de Cristiandad" ("Opus Dei
and Cursillos in Christianity"), p 61.
151. Magaña, p 117.
152. Moncada, "Historia oral del Opus Dei" ("Oral History of Opus
Dei"), p 24.
153. Jardiel Poncela, p. 175.
154. Le Vaillant, p 187.
155. Vicente Gracia, p 44.
156. Jardiel Poncela, p 88.
157. Carandell, p 131.
158. Walsh, p 19.
159. García Romanillos, op cit.
160. Moncada, "Historia oral del Opus Dei" ("Oral History of Opus
Dei"), p. 27.
161. Moreno, "El Opus Dei, anexo a una historia" ("Opus Dei, Annex to a
History"), p. 134.
162. Moncada, "Historia oral del Opus Dei" ("Oral History of Opus
Dei"), p. 27.
163. Ibid, p. 126.
164. Le Tourneau, p 21.
165. Moncada, "Historia oral del Opus Dei" ("Oral History of Opus
Dei"), p. 117.
166. Carandell, p. 152.
167. Ibid.
168. Ibid, p. 154.
169. Moreno, "La otra cara del Opus Dei" ("The Other Face of Opus
Dei"), p. 40.
170. Moreno, "El Opus Dei, anexo a una historia" ("Opus Dei, Annex to a
History"), p. 134.
171. Le Tourneau, p. 14.
172. Moncada, "Historia oral del Opus Dei" ("Oral History of Opus
Dei"), p. 107.
173. Walsh, p. 207.
174. Bernal, p. 9.
175. "ABC" newspaper (September 14, 1986), p. 52.
176. Bernal, p. 10.
Index of Chapter II
Previous Section
Next Section
Complete Index