Beyond the Threshold: A Life in Opus Dei

by María del Carmen Tapia

Much has been written about Opus Dei, which under the pontificate of Pope John Paul II has become the most powerful organization in the Roman Catholic Church. Described as a "Holy Mafia" by its critics, "The Work", as it is known, is said to have all the characteristics of a sect: excessive secretiveness, questionable recruitment practices, a shocking disregard for human rights, and an unwholesome cult of its founder.No one until now has described the inner workings of Opus Dei, from its goals and methods to the actual day to day activities of its members, with as much thoroughness and detailed knowledge as Maria del Carmen Tapia. A Numerary (full member) of Opus Dei for almost twenty years (1948-1966), she spent five years in close proximity to the founder Monsignor Escriva de Balaguer, whose beatification in 1992 raised a storm of protest for the haste and irregularity of its procedures. The author describes her recruitment, her forced estrangement from her family, her life in the "Golden Cage" of Opus Dei's governing center in Rome, her years as head of the women's section in Venezuela, her sudden reassignment to Rome, her life there as incommunicada for several months, and finally her total disillusionment and the reprisals over her attempts to leave.

This is the story of a religiously motivated young woman who was manipulated, turned into a fanatic, and only gradually came to her senses.

Genres: Religion, Memoir

Hardcover

First published May 8, 1992

About the author

Maria del Carmen Tapia nació en Cartagena (España) en 1925. En 1960 adquirió en Caracas la nacionalidad venezolana, que conserva. Creció y se educó en Madrid Entró en el Opus Dei como asociada numeraria en 1948. Vivió en las casas del Opus Dei en España hasta 1952, en que fue llamada a Roma para trabajar directamente a las órdenes de monseñor Escrivá. En 1953 fue nombrada en Roma superiora de la Asesoría Central de la sección de mujeres, donde trabajó también como primera directora de la imprenta del Opus Dei. En 1956 fue destinada a Venezuela como directora regional de la sección de mujeres. Vivió en Caracas hasta 1965, año en que monseñor Escrivá la llamó a Roma. Desde 1966 no pertenece al Opus Dei.

Reviews

[Steven H · Rating 5 out of 5]

AN 18-YEAR MEMBER TELLS HER STORY OF DEPARTURE

Author Maria Del Carman Tapia wrote in the Preface to the English edition of this 1997 book, “Some friendly criticisms have convinced me of the need to make a few comments on the nature and genesis of this book. Shortly after my separation from Opus Dei, as a healthy way of putting the pieces of my life together, I began to make notes of some of my experiences in Opus Dei… my profound concern about human rights and freedom made me regret the lack of material about women in Opus Dei. As a close witness I had a privileged vantage point and a duty to explain my experience in Opus Dei…

“Although I have used the thread of my life as a young woman who joined the institution, became a fanatic, and was brutally disillusioned, this book is not … a comprehensive study of Opus Dei… but rather testimony of my years in Opus Dei… [A] prudential reason for not alluding to that post-Opus Dei life is that Opus Dei constantly makes personal attacks on its critics to distract attention from substantive issues… the publication of my book disturbed Opus Dei so much that it made several attempts to abort… the first Spanish edition… because I touch on sensitive issues such as the lack of freedom within the institution … in which it turns members into fanatics… I am troubled by the limited critical information about Opus Dei available… The English-language edition is my personal contribution to shedding light on this hidden and manipulative presence in the country … which I consider mine.”

She explains in the Introduction, “The purpose for writing this book is to allow you to pass the threshold and into the house of the Women’s Branch of Opus Dei, where I lived as a numerary (full member) for almost six years.” (Pg. 1) Later, she adds, “I have been in a position which allows me to present an overall picture of Opus Dei’s Women’s Branch, relating my own experiences as one who entered the Opus Dei with enthusiasm and high spiritual ideas and who spend eighteen years within the institution.” (Pg. 4)

She says in the first chapter, “Opus Dei is a socio-religious phenomenon bound up with the political situation following the Spanish Civil War (July 1936 to April 1939). By the end of the war, the hopes and dreams of the country’s youth had overcome the animosities and hatred of the adults. We were filled with personal, political, and religious aspirations. We had grown up during the Civil War years, remembering years of hunger, bombings, and other the destruction of our own homes. We had suffered the loss of loved ones, not on a ‘glorious’ battlefront that seemed less and less ‘glorious’ as time went on, but by the deadly butchery wrought by fascists and criminals of the lowest type, whether communists of fascists.” (Pg. 7)

She continues, “The disruptions of the Civil War had caused young people to lose years of school… we had lost the habit of study, but not the eagerness to learn. We did not have the money to buy new books… Those children and adolescents of the Spanish Civil War … initially filled the ranks of Opus Dei. At that time, Opus Dei was practically unknown. Father Escriva’s … ‘Camino’ was a provocative invitation to postwar youth with practically no literature available other than religious books… I did not … then see the internal contradiction in this book where the frequent use of military language was combined with passages of the Gospel.” (Pg. 8-9)

She recounts, “In 1947, a year before [my] intended marriage… I accepted a position at ‘Arbor,’ the general cultural journal of the Council of Scientific Research… I was an assistant to Arbor’s associate director, Raimundo Panikkar… I was quite surprised to find a priest in such a major cultural post.” (Pg. 10) She continues, “Although busy at work, I tried to get ready for married life. Daily attendance at Mass did not seem enough; I felt the need for an intelligent priest with whom I could share my ideas and questions about my forthcoming marriage.” (Pg. 15) “I asked Father Panikkar whether he would be willing to be my spiritual adviser… [He replied] ‘I am afraid that we will have to talk at the Opus Dei’s women’s residence.’ … the name of the directress was Guadalupe…. I was 22 years old at the time and life held every possible promise of happiness.” (Pg. 16-17) “I decided to attend a retreat for young women that Father Panikkar was to give … I was not afraid of making a retreat organized by Opus Dei because I was totally confident in Father Panikkar’s spiritual guidance..” (Pg. 17-18) After the retreat, Guadalupe asked her, “Have you ever thought about the possibility of dedicating your life to God’s service as a lay woman?’ … Mine was an impossible dilemma: to give up my forthcoming marriage for God’s sake, or go ahead with my marriage knowing that I had refused God’s invitation to a life of dedicated service to him in Opus Dei…” Her fiancée told her, “If you were leaving me for another man, I would break his head, but what can I do to a God to whom I kneel every day?’” (Pg. 20-21)

She adds, “I broke up for good with my fiancé and I wrote… to Monsignor Escrivà… asking him to be accepted as a numerary … in Opus Dei.” (Pg. 22) She explains, “in Opus Dei … I learned that … that separation between men and women members is total… to my understanding, this is a reflection of Monsignor Escriva’s sexual repression.” (Pg. 24) She recalls, “Opus Dei had the appeal of not rejecting the secular world but of calling for the sanctification of ordinary work, through which you could both serve humanity and achieve your own salvation… For us Catholics who went through the turmoil and horrors of the Spanish Civil War , Opus Dei’s perspective was not only attractive but able to awaken our inner generosity. I had now been invited to participate in this adventure.” (Pg. 26)

She explains, “During the eighteen years I remained in Opus Dei my parents never came to visit me, now was I ever allowed to go to my parents’ home… The real attitude of the organization weas shown by Opus Dei superiors and priests who frequently told us that parents were often a ‘tool’ used by the Devil to destroy or take an incipient vocation away.” (Pg. 27) “Looking back… I must say that I consider totally immoral Opus Dei recruitment policies requesting people to assume a lifelong commitment as members … without first letting them read … the guidelines… after reading these guidelines, candidates should be given time to reflect and consider the responsibility their commitment would entail.” (Pg. 28)

She asserts, “During a slow and subtle process of several years Opus Dei superiors mold people’s souls. Following a period of … ‘indoctrination’---people begin to change until they acquire the ‘good spirit’ Opus Dei talks about so much and become mere robots in the hands of the organization.” (Pg. 30) Later, she adds, “It is totally forbidden in Opus Dei to have any confidential exchanges with anyone outside Opus Dei… I could not understand what it was that … we had to check everything with the directress…” (Pg. 34-35) “In January of 1950 I … left my parents’ home without their blessing and with their strong opposition to my decision to enter Opus Dei.” (Pg. 43)

She states, “One facet of Opus Dei’s brainwashing was to make its members believe that Opus Dei is perfect because it came from God and that every pronouncement by its Founder was by God’s divine inspiration… The indoctrination we received did not allow us to reflect analytically on anything we were unable to understand. Any critical thought was … a lack of ‘good spirit,’ which we had to report in our weekly chat as a negative moment in our spiritual life… were we fools or so naïve as to be manipulated like puppets? No! We had simply entered Opus Dei with the intention of doing God’s will.” (Pg. 59)

She continues, “We obviously never did anything without an ulterior motive. Our sole contact with our families was to request something or other: from a ticket to an overcoat, a dress, or money. We were told … that we always had to make our parents give us things because that way they would be united to the Work.” (Pg. 99)

She explains, “It is important to keep in mind that Monsignor Escrivà’s understanding of unity as monolithic. No divergence from his opinion was allowed. Dialogue does not exist in Opus Dei. You do things because they are done ‘just so.’ … according to … instructions sent by the Father. No one with
‘good spirit’ dares to deviate a fraction of an inch when the Father gives suggestions.” (Pg. 146)

She recalls, “On September 23, 1956, we left Rome with the blessings of Monsignor Escrivà… My heart was full of affection, confidence, and fidelity toward the Father and toward Opus Dei in general… ready to fight for the unity of the Work with all my strength.” (Pg. 172)

She laments, “Sometimes the responsibility before God of having stimulated so many vocations to Opus Dei… terrifies me. Now I realize that Opus Dei is capable of lying and doing so publicly, especially about persons who once belonged. I also realize that the superiors are capable of fictionalizing the life of Monsignor Escrivà… simply in order to have their own saint. This responsibility before God terrifies me…” (Pg. 238)

She clarifies, “I am able to write everything that follows n such detail, because when I left Opus Dei, I wrote down all the events that had occurred, including conversations and names of the witness almost as an exercise in mental health. I thought that years later I might forget events and names, and something in my heart told me that I ought to record the happenings, not our of rancor but for the sake of historic justice.” (Pg. 239)

She points out “several things that I found disturbing at the central house in Rome. Rather than a sense of inclusiveness of all countries, everything revolved around Spain… In addition, the directors lacked warmth, and there was servility rather than affection for the Father along with a cultic worship of his personality.” (Pg. 244)

She recounts, “My physical strength was diminishing, and the idea of leaving Opus Dei came to me frequently. I wept a lot at night and had dreadful headaches during the day. I thought I must ask God to take my life… The fancy of taking my own life even passed through my head, but obviously my mental health was still intact. I requested permission to do extraordinary bodily mortification, which was granted. I believe I treated my body with brutality.” (Pg. 259)

She continues, “I managed to write the letter … ‘Father, although I have been very happy in the Work for many years… I have realized that I don’t have the strength to fulfill my obligations to the Work, and I want to be dispensed from them…’ … They told me to write my parents to say that I was coming home… The idea of returning to my parents; home was a relief…” (Pg. 275) She adds a chapter on ‘Reprisals’ against her by Opus Dei, after her departure.

This book will be of great interest to those seeking critiques of Opus Dei.

[Kari Schneibel · Rating 4 out of 5]

This is my favorite autobiography. It tells the story of a lady who was a member of Opus Dei, but left the sect/cult.

[Pavel Arturovich · Rating 5 out of 5]

The work “Beyond the Threshold: A Life in Opus Dei” is an indispensable read for understanding the workings of Opus Dei from its very origins, seen through the privileged perspective of a woman who reached a position of prominence within the organisation and lived in close contact with its founder, Josemaría Escrivá.

Regrettably, the testimony of its author, Maria del Carmen Tapia, was not admitted in the process of Escrivá’s canonisation, on the grounds that she was regarded as a “declared enemy” of Opus Dei, a circumstance deemed to compromise her impartiality. A similar fate befell other former members of significance, such as Alberto Moncada, John Roche and Miguel Fisac, whose accounts, despite their historical and documentary relevance, were likewise disregarded.

With the approach of the centenary of Opus Dei’s foundation, perhaps the time has come for the Church to undertake a critical reappraisal of this structure and to reconsider testimonies that, for institutional reasons, were unjustly ignored.