The controversial apostolate of Opus Dei

Many Catholics and Catholic converts -- myself included -- have considered ourselves immeasurably enriched by the spirituality, apostolate and prelature of St. Josemaria Escriva. As some of you may recall, Scott Hahn came out with an appreciative book on his experience of Opus Dei from his early years with the work in Milwaukee while he was finishing his graduate studies at Marquette University (Scott Hahn, Ordinary Work, Extraordinary Grace: My Spiritual Journey in Opus Dei).

Yet the work, ethos, spirituality and even theology of Opus Dei continues to evoke controversy. Most of the controversy is from the proverbial 'left', which, like Dan Brown's The Da Vinci Code, paints Opus Dei as a clandestine haven for albino monk hit men for the murky Vatican underworld. But not all of the opposition is left-wing. Some can be found from the radical right of Catholic traditionalism as well.

For example, a traditionalist reader recently wrote me (and keep in mind this was email, which lends itself, at times, to unqualified statements):

I fear that many Protestant converts since Vatican II have failed to appreciate the spiritual formation of Catholics. There are few priests today even qualified to be either adequate confessors or spiritual fathers. An exception is the Eastern Catholics. Ukrainian writers like Adam A.J. deVille and Fr. Myroslaw Tataryn have a sure grasp of Catholic spirituality. DeVille's excursus on St. Maximus the Confessor (online) is the clearest exposition of this saint I have ever seen.

Many turn to Opus Dei ... seeking spiritual direction. Unfortunately Opus Dei diverges from authentic Catholic tradition in significant ways. Vide Pastoral Look at Opus Dei on Angelus online. [Nicolas Dehan, OPUS DEI: A STRANGE PASTORAL PHENOMENON, English translation by Suzanne Rini from Le Sel de la Terre (No. 11).]

Pere Francois Vallet and Padre Escriva de Balaguer appeared in Spain at the very same time. Vallet was exiled by the bishops who feared his influence, while Escriva was embraced because he flattered them.

Most Protestant converts have some acquaintance with Newman's writings. Indeed many call themselves Newmanists. But they fail to appreciate Newman's teaching on Holiness. It was living saints that drew Newman to Catholicism. No such persons existed in Anglicanism. That is why the work of Fr. Stanley Jaki is so essential. Especially his Apologetics as Meant by Newman. The speculative writing of Newman is intoxicating (neoKantian, subjectivist) but the real Newman was trying to be a saint by following the simplest examples close to him.

Thoughts?