The Relationship between John Paul II, Cardinal Sodano, Josef Ratzinger, and Opus Dei
JPII and Opus Dei spokesman Joaquin Navarro-Valls
DR.
CHOJNOWSKI: IF YOU CAN FORGIVE THIS MARXIST SPANISH PROFESSOR HIS
IDEOLOGICAL TENDENCY TO CALL EVERYTHING HE DOES NOT LIKE "FASCIST," WHAT
IS STRIKING IS THE CONNECTIONS Opus Dei HAS TO BASICALLY EVERYTHING
THAT WE HAVE BEEN CONSIDERING WITH REGARD TO THE SISTER LUCY CASE, THE
THIRD SECRET, THE POST-CONCILIAR PAPACY, CHRISTENDOM COLLEGE, ETC.
IT
HAS BEEN READERS LETTERS AND NOTES THAT HAVE PUSHED US IN THIS
DIRECTION. I KNEW, FROM THE EARLY 90S, WHEN Opus Dei WAS TRYING TO
RECRUIT ME, THAT THEY WERE DEVOTED TO EVERYTHING ABOUT JOHN PAUL II ---
EVEN HIS PHENOMENOLOGY AND HUMANISM. WHAT THE AUTHOR IS IDEOLOGICALLY
BLINDED TO IS THAT Opus
Dei WAS "CHRISTIAN DEMOCRAT" IN POLITICS AND PROFOUNDLY "LIBERAL" IN
MATTERS OF ECONOMICS. IT WAS IN THIS WAY THAT THEY TRIED TO OVERTURN THE
FRANCO REGIME BY INFILTRATING IT THROUGH ITS ECONOMIC POLICY SINCE THEY
KNEW THEY COULD NOT GET RID OF FRANCO DIRECTLY. THEY WERE SUPPORTERS OF
LIBERAL CAPITALISM, CHRISTIAN DEMOCRACY, AND THE "DEMOCRACY" MOVEMENTS
IN THE POST-SOVIET EUROPE. NOTICE THE SLIGHT REFERENCE TO THEIR
RELATIONSHIP WITH CIA DIRECTOR BILL CASEY. SO IF YOU CAN STOMACH THE
LEFTISM --- REMEMBER, A STOPPED CLOCK IS RIGHT TWICE A DAY --- THE
AUTHOR DRAWS SOME VERY INTERESTING CONNECTIONS WHICH SHOULD BE FOLLOWED
UP TO MAKE OUR PRESENT SITUATION CLEAR.
A Profoundly Rightwing Pope
The predominant perception of John Paul II, as extensively reproduced in
most of the Western media, is that he was very conservative
(“traditional” is the term widely used) in religious subjects but
progressive in social matters, as evidenced by his defense of the poor
and his concern for human and social rights. His key ideological role in
the demise of the Soviet Union is put forward as further proof of his
commitment to liberty and democracy. John Paul’s support for the Polish
trade union Solidarnosc, his numerous speeches in support of the poor
and of those left behind by capitalism or globalization, and his
frequent calls for human solidarity not to mention his opposition to the
invasion of Iraq by U.S. forces all are presented as examples of his
progressiveness in the social arena.
In this perception of Pope John Paul II, some critical elements are
forgotten. Let’s detail them. He was groomed for the Papacy, long before
he was elected Pope, by the ultra-right-wing sect Opus Dei. This secret
organization was founded by Monsignor Escrivá, a Spanish priest who was
formerly a private confessor to General Franco, organizing spiritual
meetings for the Spanish fascist leadership. Opus Dei chose John Paul as
the candidate for Pope very early in his career, when he was bishop of
Krakow. His conservatism and anti-communism were very attractive to this
sect.
John Paul traveled extensively at that time on trips organized and
funded by Opus Dei, developing a very close working relationship with
the sect. Opus Dei was the organization that developed the strategy to
make him the Pope, assisted by the bishop of Munich, Joseph Ratzinger;
the U.S. cardinals close to Opus Dei, Joseph Krol and Patrick Cody; and a
cardinal then close to Opus Dei, Cardinal Franz König from Vienna (who
later distanced himself from Opus Dei and from the Pope). The center of
operations for this campaign was Villa Tevere, the Opus Dei headquarters
in Rome.
Immediately after his election as Pope, John Paul designated Opus Dei as
a special order directly accountable to him, not to the bishops. He
surrounded himself with members of the order, the most visible being
Navarro-Valls, an Opus Dei journalist who had worked for Abc, an
ultra-conservative Spanish paper that had been supportive of the Franco
regime. Navarro-Valls is well-known for selecting journalists to cover
the Pope’s international visits who would report on them favorably. He
constantly vetoed critical voices, such as that of Domenico del Rio of
the Italian paper La Repubblica.
The Pope later named another Opus Dei member, Angelo Sodano, as
Secretary of State of the Vatican. Sodano had been the Vatican’s
ambassador in Chile during the Pinochet dictatorship, becoming a close
friend and advisor to the dictator. He was responsible for the Pope’s
visit to the Pinochet dictatorship in 1987. During this visit, the Pope
never called publicly for liberty or democracy in Chile. By contrast,
when John Paul visited Cuba he was publicly critical of the Cuban
regime. But he remained silent when he visited Pinochet. Later, when
Pinochet was detained in London (awaiting extradition to Spain at the
request of the Spanish Judge Baltazar Garzon), the Vatican, under
Sodano’s influence, asked the British Government to let Pinochet return
to Chile. This same Sodano had referred to liberation theologian
Leonardo Boff one of the most popular priests in Latin America as “a
traitor to the Church, the Judas of Christ.” Under Pope John Paul II,
the founder of Opus Dei was made a saint just twenty seven years after
his death (one of the fastest such processes ever). Meanwhile, Pope John
XXIII and Bishop Romero, assassinated in El Salvadore because of his
support for the poor of that country, have been waiting in line for
sainthood for a much longer time.
Opus Dei and its Pope were profoundly hostile to liberation theology.
John Paul condemned it at the II Latin American Conference, presided
over by Opus Dei member Monsignor Alfonso Lopez Trujillo, Secretary
General and later president of that Conference. John Paul also was
displeased with the Jesuits who had become increasingly concerned about
identification of the Church with the strong oligarchical regimes of
Latin America. He changed the leadership of the order, appointing very
conservative priests as its new leadership. As reported by the ex-Jesuit
Luis de Sebastian in the Spanish Daily El Periodico (5 April 2005), the
Pope received periodical reports from U.S. CIA Director William Casey
(a Roman Catholic) on the “distressing” Jesuit movements in Latin
America.
John Paul’s speeches on the poor were highly generic and sanctimonious,
humanistic in character, without ever touching on the cause of poverty.
As the Brazilian Bishop Helder Camara once said, “When I called for the
role of the Church to be with the poor, I am called a saint; when I’m
asked to do something about the causes of poverty, I am called a
communist.”
John Paul was profoundly political, always on the side of the powerful
in Latin America and in Spain. He never touched on the political causes
of poverty, he marginalized and ostracized the mass religious movements
in Latin America that called for major social reforms in favor of the
poor, and (with Cardinal Ratzinger, the guardian of the Church
orthodoxy) he condemned such movements, ordering their leading figures
Gustavo Gutierrez, Leonardo Boff, Jon Sobrino, and others to remain
silent. Bishop Romero wrote in his personal notes that, when he
denounced the brutal repression carried out by the fascist dictatorship
in El Salvador, the Pope reprimanded him for not being sufficiently
balanced in his criticisms of the Salvadorian dictatorship, whom John
Paul referred to as the legitimate government of El Salvador.
In Spain, John Paul was political to an extreme. He was openly
supportive of the post-Francoist party, the Popular Party (whose founder
is Fraga Iribarne, ex-Minister of the Interior of the Franco fascist
regime) and just a few months before his death he gave a speech against
the Zapatero government that was actually written by the pro Popular
Party leadership of the Spanish Church. Although he opposed the invasion
of Iraq and the bombing of the Iraqi population, he never condemned the
Franco regime (which the Spanish Church supported), nor did he ever
condemn the bombing of Spain’s civilian population by the Franco Air
Force, with the help of German Nazi bombers. When he was asked to
condemn the bombing of Spanish cities by the Church-supported fascist
forces of Spain, he declined to do so.
Rather than pushing a social agenda worldwide, Pope John Paul II became a
major obstacle to such an agenda by making conservative issues
(anti-abortion, anti-contraception, anti-homosexuality, and others)
rather than social ones the center of political debate. The evolution of
the U.S. political debate among Catholics is an example of this. In the
past, Catholics in the U.S. voted Democrat more than Republican, but
this is no longer the case. In the 2004 presidential election, more
Catholics voted for Bush (52%) than for Kerry (47%), and they indicated
that the primary reason they supported Bush was the “values” issue.
Based on all this evidence, it is remarkable that John Paul II, Opus Dei’s Pope, can be considered a progressive icon.
VICENTE NAVARRO is Professor of Public Policy at Johns Hopkins University, USA and Pompeu Fabra University, Spain. Navarro
Fr Hesse: Opus Dei and Communism
