View source for Legal case against Opus Dei and English bishops

By Michael Chambers – Former Numerary from Scotland, February 6, 2025


I am an English former numerary of Opus Dei – and former lawyer – who is taking legal action against Opus Dei and Catholic bishops.

I was a numerary living in men’s centres in Scotland and England between 1995 and 2004. For many years after I left, I experienced psychological damage related to my Opus Dei years. I am now starting claims for compensation for this in an English civil court against Opus Dei, but also against the Catholic bishops in whose dioceses I lived at the time. As far as I know, this will be the first claim of its type against Catholic bishops. There are more details and updates here: [https://www.gofundme.com/f/groundbreaking-legal-action-vs-opus-dei-rc-dioceses-in-uk https://www.gofundme.com/f/groundbreaking-legal-action-vs-opus-dei-rc-dioceses-in-uk]

===My Catholic background===

In 1972, I was placed for adoption as a new-born – for “Catholic” reasons – with an alcoholic Catholic couple via the Archdiocese of Westminster, in circumstances now regarded as a “forced adoption”. Like most lay people drawn into Opus Dei, I had been a lifelong, churchgoing Catholic, attending Catholic schools and youth activities. The Catholic faith was a rock of certainty for me in a lonely world. So when I asked to commit myself to Opus Dei in 1995, the Catholic church had prepared me for that kind of step and I honestly had no reason to doubt that Opus Dei was a genuine Catholic organisation, endorsed by the Catholic hierarchy in Scotland and England.

===Forced, illegal confession and spiritual direction===

After asking to “join”, Opus Dei imposed on me the fraudulent burdens of conscience that I had to

# confess at least weekly to a numerary priest of Opus Dei and
# to have intimate weekly “fraternal chats”, including on sexual matters, with a numerary of Opus Dei assigned to me by the directors of the centre where I lived.

Not to do these things was unthinkable, tantamount to turning one’s back on Opus Dei,  and more importantly risking one’s eternal salvation.

These burdens are imposed on all lay people of Opus Dei even to this day. Requiring lay people to bare their souls in the fraternal chat is a “manifestation of conscience”, banned in canon law under canon 530 in the 1917 code and 630 in the 1983 code, still in force.<br>

===Investigations of Opus Dei by senior English Catholics in 1980===

What I did not know when I “joined” Opus Dei in 1995 was that senior English Catholic clergy and Oxford University Catholic chaplains had extensively investigated Opus Dei’s abusive practices and non-Catholic ideas. This investigation led to a long-form article in “The Times” (of London) dated 12 January 1981, called “The Times Profile of Opus Dei”, which painted a shocking picture of the nature of Opus Dei. (You can access it here: [[File:The_Times_Profile_of_Opus_Dei_-_Jan_12,1981.pdf|here]] )

It is worth quoting a few of the key passages:

''“[Former numerary] Dr John Roche … – who remains a practising Catholic – alleges that Opus Dei is … psychologically dangerous to its own members. “Personal identity suffers a severe battering ; some are reduced to shadows of their former selves; others become severely disturbed.”''

''“The very rigidity of its doctrines and the daily observances it imposes seem to offer a refuge from doubt in an uncertain world for the lonely, the emotionally immature, and those with an unfulfilled sense of mission…”''

''“What most disturbs observers … is the effect of the old-fashioned and strict quasi-monastic regime in an OD residence on immature young people …''

''“Several senior Roman Catholic clergy have seen some or all of the material in The Times’ possession. One was a member of the English hierarchy; one an academic theologian, and a member of the Theological Committee of the Roman Catholic Bishops’ Conference; and one holds a senior position in the Benedictine order. Their views coincided, that it [the Opus Dei spiritual reading material they saw] was “unhealthy” and psychologically and spiritually harmful.”<br> ''<br>''“Doubts were raised about the orthodoxy of some of the doctrine. They were satisfied that it was in the best interests of the Catholic church that it should come to light.”” ''

The article cites this section from ''Cronica'', an internal Opus Dei publication:<br>''“No other means of salvation [than Opus Dei] exists.”''

===Bishop Crispian Hollis===

The article also quotes former chaplain of Oxford University, Father Crispian Hollis:<br>''“[He] described the influence of OD as “pernicious””''

Fr Hollis went on to become Bishop of Portsmouth in the 1990s, including my time in the men’s centre of Oxford, which is within his diocese. However, he did nothing to contact me or make known his concerns about Opus Dei in public. He is now the first defendant in my court proceedings. The other bishops in whose dioceses I lived also failed to act and I hope to add them or their representatives to my legal action soon.

===Cardinal Hume’s guidelines===

Following The Times’ investigation, Cardinal Hume issued pastoral guidelines relating to Opus Dei, in December 1981, which included:

“[Guideline] ''3. While it is accepted that those who join Opus Dei take on the proper duties and responsibilities of membership, care must be taken to respect the freedom of the individual; first, the freedom of the individual to join or to leave the organisation without undue pressure being exerted; secondly, the freedom of the individual at any stage to choose his or her own spiritual director, whether or not the director is a member of Opus Dei''.”  [https://archive.catholicherald.co.uk/article/11th-december-1981/1/opus-dei-accepts-cardinal-humes-memo-on-pastoral-g https://archive.catholicherald.co.uk/article/11th-december-1981/1/opus-dei-accepts-cardinal-humes-memo-on-pastoral-g]

This guideline addressed the forced confessions and forced manifestations of conscience. The guidelines were supposedly “accepted” by Opus Dei in the UK at that time. However, they were not communicated by the prelature to lay people during my time or implemented within Opus Dei.  In this, the prelature ignored its own internal “statutes”:<br><br>

''“176…the authorities of the Prelature are to ensure that its faithful are well informed about the pastoral norms and guidelines established by the competent territorial ecclesiastical Authority (Bishops’ Conference, diocesan Bishop, etc.), so that each one may put them into effect and cooperate with them, …” ''[https://opusdei.org/en/article/statutes-of-opus-dei-eng/ https://opusdei.org/en/article/statutes-of-opus-dei-eng/]

I have seen internal documents of Opus Dei in Spanish from 1985 and 2001 on the content of the fraternal chat. It is clear that this practice of Opus Dei has always operated in the same way across the world and it is hard to imagine that Opus Dei would ever let its supposedly divine practices be subject to the pastoral guidelines of a peripheral bishop.

===English bishops fail to follow up===

Following Cardinal Hume’s guidelines, no other Catholic bishop issued similar ones for their dioceses, nor did they publicly endorse Cardinal Hume’s to my knowledge. None of them, not even later cardinals in Westminster, followed them up meaningfully.

It is an ongoing scandal that Cardinal Hume’s guidelines are not available even today on the websites of that diocese nor of Opus Dei.

Why is it that English bishops have done so little since then? In 1980, they had identified a serious risk of psychological damage to people of Opus Dei as well as exposure to doctrines that they considered “unhealthy” and incompatible with the Catholic faith. Why did the trail go cold? Why let Opus Dei abusers off the hook?

This is the official answer from lawyers for the Catholic dioceses in the formal response to my claim against Bishop Hollis, filed in Bath County Court:

''<br>“Opus Dei is and was at all material times an independent selfgoverning international Catholic Personal Prelature established by the Apostolic See, namely the Pope in his role as the Bishop of Rome, over which the Defendant at no time had any authority or control.”''

In other words, “Opus Dei are Catholic but we Catholic bishops have nothing to do with them.”  This is obviously absurd and not true even in Opus Dei’s “statutes”:

''“172. § 2. They [all the faithful of the Prelature] are also subject to the local Ordinaries in accordance with universal law in the same way as other Catholics in their own diocese, …”''

Catholic bishops are responsible for overseeing matters of faith and morals that are common to all lay people in their dioceses, including lay people of Opus Dei. How they exercise that oversight can vary but let’s remember that lay people of Opus Dei are lay in the same way as everyone else: they cannot be “members” of the prelature of Opus Dei. The membership of prelatures has always been confined to the clergy, under canon 294. See [https://www.intratext.com/IXT/ENG0017/__PZ.HTM https://www.intratext.com/IXT/ENG0017/__PZ.HTM]

So in his 1981 guidelines, Cardinal Hume was exercising his authority to safeguard the lay flock entrusted to him, including those of Opus Dei, in line with canon law. His successor, Cardinal Vincent Nichols, reaffirmed his commitment to Cardinal Hume’s guidelines in a comment offered to a journalist in 2024, though sadly it was not published. He has taken no other meaningful step to implement the guidelines.

===The involvement of Pope John Paul II===

To understand the real reasons why English bishops did not follow up their concerns after 1981, it is worth remembering that Pope John Paul II visited the UK in 1982 and approved Opus Dei as a prelature in the same year.  We can well imagine the pressure from Opus Dei and the Vatican on English bishops to ignore their well-grounded concerns about Opus Dei and its disregard for pastoral and canonical norms. After all, popes are not subject to any equivalent of the ''Magna Carta'': they have absolute power are not even subject to the canon laws that they may themselves pass. This means popes can force bishops to choose between their position in the church and their well-informed consciences. If this happened here, Pope John Paul committed spiritual abuses against his bishops in England – abuses of conscience.

And in ignoring their own well-informed consciences about Opus Dei, English Catholic bishops in turn chose to keep their positions in the church at the expense of protecting the spiritual and psychological welfare of a small portion of their flocks that they knew were especially at risk of abuse. What kind of person would force bishops into such a Faustian bargain? Not someone guided by God, that’s for sure.

===Bishops have to be in the frame===

I hope you now have some idea of why English bishops ought to be in the frame for the psychological abuse that Opus Dei numeraries and priests inflicted on me. Simply, they knew too much about the abuses of Opus Dei and then they acted as if they knew nothing or were helpless. This situation is surely very similar across the world.

Not only have bishops turned a blind eye to the abuses of Opus Dei that they uncovered, they have invited Opus Dei priests to run parishes, such as St Thomas More in Swiss Cottage, London, in the archdiocese of Westminster. Bishops have now conjured up an even worse Faustian bargain: ignore the known abuses of Opus Dei against its own lay people or put at risk the running of parishes. How deep can the ostrich-like necks of bishops reach into their dirt? Let’s hope there’s no Opus Dei money involved, at least.

===Redemption for bishops===

The good news is that bishops and retired bishops can redeem themselves by coming clean. It would be good for their consciences, their happiness and their relationships with God. They are people, not just office-holders. It would be cleansing. They know it but so far none have developed the ''cojones'' to speak out.

And after speaking out, they then need to act: first of all, to stop the forced confessions and fraternal chats and ban Opus Dei priests and lay people from engaging in them. They need to find practical ways to integrate lay people of Opus Dei into their dioceses fully and sensitively, and to offer them pastoral and psychological support in this process. They can do this if they want, and under Pope Francis, I am sure that they can take their own initiative without papal sanction. They just need to get over themselves, their pride, and their inertia. Just Do It.

===My motivations===

I have forgiven those individuals in Opus Dei who hurt me and harbour no more anger about those hurts. This has set me free to take this action for the sake of those left behind and also those yet to be seduced by Opus Dei. After my forgiveness, God moved swiftly to tell me that He needed me to take this action, that He had equipped me with the experience and skills to do this without legal representation. This has made me a public opponent of Opus Dei. God has strengthened me to lose my fear of Opus Dei and to care little for my reputation and good name.

My psychological injuries included utterly humiliating psychotic episodes of a Christian nature, and soon a large number of professionals, church figures and people in Opus Dei, including my abusers, will know about them when they see my expert medical report, which cost me personally over £1,000. But for Christians, Jesus Christ is our model in accepting smears with meekness and what we accept is small beer in comparison. This legal action is God’s work – a true ''opus dei'' – and it will make a difference, win or lose.

===Support me===

If you want to support me, then you can do so financially, or with information on complaints about Opus Dei to bishops, or if you are an “ex” or a Catholic cleric, by being a witness. It doesn’t matter which country you are from. I could do with some US witnesses, if I’m honest.

I cannot promise victory – there are some formidable legal obstacles to my case – but I can promise dedication. I have a supportive medical expert report, which I hope will have value in putting bishops on notice of the psychological risk

===The USA dimension===

The UK is something of a backwater for Opus Dei, with low numbers and few fresh recruits. Opus Dei sees the USA, rather, as its happy hunting ground and, with the religious right in the ascendant there, it can be hard for US Americans to put their heads above the parapet publicly on the abuses by Opus Dei. So perhaps it is fitting that this kind of legal action takes place here first in the UK, in a common law nation, whose principles of tort law can be exported to some extent into legal actions in US states and other common-law jurisdictions.

===God is fed up!===

Finally, I know that God’s hand is on me and this case – win or lose. God is utterly fed up with Opus Dei’s shenanigans and the Catholic hierarchy’s complicity. Like St Michael, I believe I’m fighting for freedom and that I stand for love. Of course, you’re entitled to doubt me but if you do, then I would welcome the opportunity to meet in person or online – and that includes people of Opus Dei. Until then, hold your judgment. You can use this email address [mailto:eagleeyeddan@gmail.com eagleeyeddan@gmail.com] to set up a meeting.

Thank you for reading.


[[Category:Writings]]