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.


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