List of points

We would like to begin this interview with a subject on which opinions are highly divided: the question of aggiornamento. In your opinion, what is the real meaning of this word in the life of the Church?

Faithfulness. Aggiornamento, as I see it, means above all faithfulness. A husband, a soldier, an administrator, who faithfully fulfils at each moment, in each new circumstance of his life, the duties of love and justice which he once took on, will always be just that much better a husband, soldier or administrator. It is difficult to keep this keen sense of loyalty constantly active, as it is always difficult to apply a principle to the changing realities of the contingent world. But it is the best defence against ageing of the spirit, hardening of the heart and stiffening of the mind.

The same thing applies to the lives of institutions, and in a very special way to the life of the Church which does not follow a precarious human plan but a God-given design. The world's redemption and salvation are the fruits of Jesus Christ's loving filial faithfulness to the will of the heavenly Father Who sent Him, and of our faithfulness to Him. Therefore aggiornamento in the Church, today as in any other period, is fundamentally a joyful reaffirmation of the People of God's faithfulness to the mission received, to the Gospel.

This faithfulness should be alive and active in every circumstance of men's lives. It therefore requires opportune doctrinal developments in the exposition of the riches of the depositum fidei, as can clearly be seen in the two thousand years of the Church's history and recently in the Second Vatican Council. It may also require suitable changes and reforms to improve, in their human and perfectible element, the organisational structures and the missionary and apostolic methods of the Church. But it would be, to say the least, superficial to think that aggiornamento consists primarily in change, or that all change produces aggiornamento. One need only consider that there are people who seek changes which go outside and against the Church's doctrine and would put the progressive movement of the People of God back several centuries in history. back at least to feudal times.

Turning to another topic, we would like to know your opinion regarding the present situation of the Church. How would you describe it? What role do you think can be played in these times by the tendencies which in general terms have been called 'progressive' and 'integrist'?

As I see it, the present doctrinal position of the Church could be expressed as 'positive' and at the same time 'delicate', as in all crises of growth. Positive, undoubtedly, because the doctrinal wealth of the Second Vatican Council has set the entire Church, the entire priestly People of God, on a new supremely hopeful track of renewed fidelity to the divine plan of salvation which has been entrusted to it. But delicate as well, because the theological conclusions which have been reached are not, let us say, of an abstract or theoretical nature. They are part of a supremely living theology, which has immediate and direct applications in the pastoral, ascetic and disciplinary fields and which touches very deeply the internal and external life of the Church: liturgy, organisational structures of the hierarchy, apostolic forms, Magisterium, dialogue with the world, ecumenism. And therefore at the same time this theology touches very deeply the Christian life and the very conscience of the faithful.

Both aspects affect us deeply: both Christian optimism, the joyful certainty that the Holy Spirit will draw fruit from the doctrine with which He has enriched the Spouse of Christ; and also prudence on the part of those who study and govern because, now especially, immense harm could result from a lack of serenity and consideration in the study of these problems.

As regards the tendencies which you call 'integrist' and 'progressive', I find it difficult to give an opinion on the role which they can play at the present moment, because I have always rejected the suitability and even the possibility of making classifications or simplifications of this sort. This division is, at times, taken to great extremes and perpetuated as if theologians (and the faithful in general) were destined always to be circling these opposite poles. As far as I can see, it seems to derive ultimately from the belief that progress in the doctrine and in the life of the People of God is the result of a perpetual dialectical tension. I, on the other hand, prefer to believe wholeheartedly in the action of the Holy Spirit, who breathes where He will and upon whom He will.

Finally, are you satisfied with these forty years of activity? Has the experience of recent years (social changes, the Second Vatican Council, etc.) by any chance suggested any changes in the structure of Opus Dei?

Satisfied? I cannot but be satisfied, when I see that, despite my own wretchedness, our Lord built up so many wonderful things around this Work of God. The life of a man who lives by Faith will always be the story of the mercies of God. At some moments the story may perhaps be difficult to read, because everything can seem useless and even a failure. But at other times our Lord lets one see how the fruit abounds and then it is natural for one's soul to break out in thanksgiving.

Indeed, one of my greatest joys was to see the Second Vatican Council so clearly proclaim the divine vocation of the laity. Without any boasting, I would say that, as far as our spirit is concerned, the Council has not meant an invitation to change but, on the contrary, has confirmed what, with the grace of God, we have been living and teaching for so many years. The principal characteristic of Opus Dei is not a set of techniques or methods of apostolate, not any specific structures, but a spirit which moves one to sanctify one's ordinary work.

As I have repeated on so many occasions, we all have personal shortcomings and miseries. And we all should examine ourselves seriously in God's presence and check to see how our life measures up to our Lord's demands. But we should not forget the most important thing: 'If only you knew the gift of God!' (John 4:10) as Jesus said to the Samaritan woman. And St Paul adds: 'We carry this treasure in earthenware jars, to show that the abundance of the power is God's and not ours' (2 Cor 4:7).

Humility, Christian self-examination, begins with recognising God's gift. It is something quite distinct from shrugging one's shoulders at the way things are going. And it has nothing to do with a sense of futility or discouragement in the face of history. In one's personal life, and sometimes also in the life of associations or institutions, there may be things which have to change, perhaps a lot of things. But the attitude with which a Christian should face these problems should be, above all, one of amazement at the greatness of the works of God, compared with the littleness of man.

Aggiornamento should take place, principally, in one's personal life so as to bring it into line with the 'old novelty' of the Gospel. Being 'up-to-date' means identifying oneself with Christ who is not a figure of the past: Christ is living and will live for all ages: 'yesterday and today and forever' (Heb 13:8).

Taking Opus Dei as a whole it can be said without any kind of arrogance but with gratitude to the goodness of God, it will never have any problems of adaptation to the world: it will never find itself in need of being brought 'up-to-date.'

God our Lord put Opus Dei up to date once and for all when he gave the Work its particular lay characteristics. It will never need to adapt itself to the world, because all its members are of the world. It will never be forced to catch up with human progress because it is the members of the Work, together with all the other people who live in the world, who make human progress, by means of their ordinary work.