The news article on Opus Dei linked below sparked some reflections and a few thoughts. Pro Forma declaration: Our family has never officially been affiliated with Opus Dei but has benefitted tremendously from them over the past 2-½ decades. I also respect Michael Voris and the work of Church Militant.
So how to reconcile the two organizations in this instance where it appears either one or the other must be at fault. The answer to the dilemma was sparked by a recent critique I was asked to give on a PowerPoint presentation. This person’s response seems fairly typical an illustrative. It was rebutted, debated, and finally ignored. Similar to the comments I read on CM.
There are three responses to both the CM & personal critiques with varying degrees of merit.
- Totally dismiss the suggestions. Yes, I have been subject to having my opinion clearly asked for then promptly and totally rejected. Recent & not logical.
The next 2 have varying degrees of humility and courage needed.
- Reject at first, a normal human reaction to having something dear to us questioned, and then when tempers cool decide if critique has merit. I have found all human endeavors have room for improvement.
- Reject, reflect on points made, implement a plan to deal with concerns, and then schedule follow up meeting with those who had the most problems (assuming this person isn’t nutty, which can happen). Voris is not nutty, and his love for the faith is credible (to use the word of the day).
I propose to Opus Dei (and those who respect it), to watch the interview, in as detached manner as possible, see which changes need to be made, then schedule a follow up interview with Voris. Give him free-range (another popular term) to investigate. He will be doing the organization a favor finding its weak points. You will do him a favor giving him another show to air. Win-win.
The third point is the best and yet very rarely done.
In caritas,
Karen