Talk:Opus Dei

1. Redirect Template:Dated maintenance category

1. REDIRECT Template:Archives

Members proposed for sainthood

The Focolare movement has a good section on its members who have been proposed for sainthood. A similar section here would be great. Here's the Focolare example. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Focolare_Movement 2600:4040:279C:2700:6C00:5E7A:8D15:832D (talk) 02:42, 20 July 2023 (UTC)

I think this would be a wonderful idea. It would also help clean up the "Post-foundational years" section that is supposed to be a section under "History". In its present form, the section mentions (lists) various individual members of Opus Dei, but does little to explain the history of the institution as such. Moving some of these names to a separate section alleviate this problem. Zosima13 (talk) 19:34, 29 October 2024 (UTC)

Rewrite?

It seems to me that this article needs to be rewritten and reorganized. The lede, for example, does not clearly explain what Opus Dei is, nor what its mission is. Instead, it goes into detail about its juridical approvals and governance structure. Other sections are a hodgepodge of disparate pieces of information loosely gathered together into sections. The "post-foundational" sub-section of the "History" section, for example, contains information about its becoming a personal prelature, then goes on to talk about various members, and controversies without any apparent narrative structure. It also focuses on specific events of individual members instead of the history of the institution as such. The section on "Relations with Catholic leaders" seems to be more a list of endorsements that does not add much factual content. Similarly, the section "Controversy" seems like a list of complaints and counter complaints that mention potentially controversial topics, but does little to elaborate, contextualize, or explain the background of these charges. A similar critique in the other direction can be made with regard to the "Other views" section. So, it seems to me that if we want some clear information about Opus Dei, this article needs to be rethought, rewritten, and reorganized. I would like to know others' opinions about this and suggestions of what a rewritten article would look like (I have some ideas of my own, but it would be helpful to get others' perspectives as well). Zosima13 (talk) 19:23, 29 October 2024 (UTC)

I would advise against rewriting the page, I don't think you are the editor for the job (nor am I convinced that this is a job that actually needs to be done). Horse Eye's Back (talk) 17:12, 21 November 2024 (UTC)

Proposed new lede (just first sentence)

Hello, I changed the first sentence of the lede to the following, but it was reverted either because it was "promotional" or "unreliable source" or both (sorry, couldn't figure it out. I thought it was an improvement over the current sentence. So, I would like to know what was wrong with it. Here's my proposed text.

Opus Dei, formally known as Prelature of the Holy Cross and Opus Dei, is an institution of the Catholic Church founded in 1928 by Josemaría Escrivá in Spain. Its name, Opus Dei, means "Work of God" in Latin and its mission centers on helping ordinary Christians seek holiness in everyday life, particularly through their work and daily routines.[ref: John Paul II, Apostolic constitution Ut sit, November 28, 1992]

Per WP:LEAD, the lead should summarize the article and not introduce new points that's not in the article already. The current 2nd sentence replicates the mission stated in the article and cited to Escrivá. I don't see what you want to say in the article. And why is that what you want to say is better? You might have thought it was an improvement but the WP:ONUS is on you to persuade others why it is. You haven't done that. I don't see it. DeCausa (talk) 22:51, 21 November 2024 (UTC)

Agreed. DN (talk) 23:00, 21 November 2024 (UTC)

Lede: supporters and critics

Another paragraph I think would be helpful for the lede is this.

I would change the current sentence that says: While Opus Dei has met controversies, it has strong support from Catholic leadership.

To something like the following that fleshes it out a bit more, but doesn't go into details (and can be explained in later sections):

The organization has received both support and criticism over the years. Supporters appreciate its emphasis on living out their Christian faith in the world, rather than retreating from it, which aligns with their desire to be active participants in society while maintaining strong Christian values. Critics, on the other hand, view some of its practices are overly strict and accuse it seeking to power and influence through secretive and manipulative means. Zosima13 (talk) 22:39, 21 November 2024 (UTC)