25.01.2007
Some more equal than others
There is no religious 'right to discriminate', says Jim Moody
As minister for equality, Ruth Kelly was a bizarre choice - to put it mildly. After all, she is a member of Opus Dei, a Roman catholic masochistic cult that has extreme rightwing antecedents and today champions homophobia.
It seems that Tony Blair has now teamed up with Kelly to try to scupper an important section of the Equality Act 2006, which is due to come into force in April. Some senior ministers have started briefing against this unholy pair, since they seem intent on pushing through an exemption clause, allowing religious bodies to continue discriminating against gays and lesbians. Until now, for example, Roman catholic adoption agencies have been able to refuse to place children with homosexual couples on the basis that they are not married. With the catholic church in the lead, various religious groupings - christian, muslim and jewish - have been lobbying hard for the 'right' to treat gays and lesbians unequally.
In fact, Blair sacked the previous minister with responsibility for equality, Alan Johnson, because he refused to go along with this sordid plan. It was the reason Kelly had responsibility for equality tacked onto her existing job as secretary of state for communities and local government last May. She is due to issue a formal letter outlining the exemption, having been delayed by this indecent brouhaha in cabinet. That is, if they can bamboozle their way through. Blair knew he could trust to the reactionary tendencies of a true believer and member of this cult.
Partly Blair has in mind, no doubt, the effect the prohibition against discrimination might have on the sectarian-fractured political landscape of Scotland. Elections to the Scottish parliament are only three months away, and on his prime ministerial watch. Labour mandarins are running scared at a large nationalist vote; their own vote may well go down the pan. So anything Blair can do to garner catholic votes north of the border is fair game. He clearly sees Roman catholics as a mindless vote bank to be manipulated any which way he can, merely acting according to the dictates of their church hierarchy. It is the way that 'faith communities' are supposed to react, after all. This is a modus operandi that Blair shares with elements of the left, sad to say, such as the Socialist Workers Party, which prefers appealing to the mosque, for example, than directly to muslim workers.
It is quite ironic, if not cynically hypocritical, then, that Kelly, as the senior of two ministers for women comprising the Women and Equality Unit, does not practise what she preaches. The WEU website states: "The ministers for women, supported by the Women and Equality Unit (WEU), are responsible for promoting and realising the benefits of diversity in the economy and more widely. This includes taking forward proposals on civil partnerships and the future of our equality bodies" (www.womenandequalityunit.gov.uk/about/role.htm). Yet Kelly is totally opposed to equal treatment for gays and lesbians when it comes to questions like adoption - a massive contradiction.
As one of the blessed cognoscenti, Kelly supports the Opus Dei view that practising homosexuals are sinners and, according to the Vatican, that adoption by them is "gravely immoral". She is now doing her duty in line with her political conviction (not simply religious belief), in complete agreement with her co-thinkers. Religious views obviously have an effect on the politics of the believer and members of Opus Dei are no exception. Kelly has been absent from every important vote on homosexuality since Labour came to power in 1997. When she was appointed secretary of state for education and challenged on her extreme views, Kelly asserted: "I do have spiritual support from Opus Dei and I think that's right. These are private spiritual matters" (Breakfast with Frost January 23 2005). In point of fact, however, the separation between her political work and her faith suggested by Kelly's phrase, "private spiritual matters", is completely contrary to Opus Dei's stated aim of sanctifying all of society through its members' work - this organisation's aims are deeply political.
It may be some small consolation to those of a sensitive disposition to know that, as one of the 'supernumeraries' of Opus Dei (70% of its members), Kelly is not required to inflict pain upon herself. However, the 'numerary', celibate members are expected to do so: regular self-flagellation and a cilice (inward-pointing metal spikes) worn on the upper thigh are de rigueur.
In early 2005, John Allen, Vatican correspondent of the National Catholic Reporter, wrote: "The fact that Opus Dei has been given a parish in Westminster and Ruth Kelly has been appointed education secretary are both signs of Opus Dei coming in from the cold ... Ruth Kelly will not be given her marching orders in terms of making policy" (quoted by The Scotsman January 21 2005).
Opus Dei was established in 1928 by a Spanish priest, Josemaria Escrivá (canonised in 2002). It has about 520 members in Britain and 80,000 worldwide; its net worth in the UK is currently around £20million. It is unique in the Roman catholic church in organising its members in a global diocese. Several of its 20-plus centres in and around London, Oxford, Manchester and Glasgow run activities for young people: Kelston Club in Wandsworth; Tamezin Club in Chelsea; and Dunreath Club in Glasgow. Opus Dei in the UK also runs 'preached retreats', organised regularly at Wickenden Manor, East Grinstead and Thornycroft Hall, Macclesfield. Followers believe 'The Work' (Opus Dei is Latin for 'work of god'), as Escrivá said, is set to last until the end of history.
Escrivá was a Francoist fascist who hated protestantism and other religions fanatically; he easily qualified as a fundamentalist. Former Opus Dei member and British priest Wladimir Felzmann recalls Escrivá telling him that with Hitler's help the Franco government had saved christianity from communism, adding approvingly: "Hitler against the Jews, Hitler against the Slavs - this means Hitler against communism." Indeed, from the 1940s Opus Dei members were senior government ministers in Franco's Spain; its members were also at the centre of the political transition to the post-Franco period of the present day, ensuring that the capitalist state was protected.
As part of the post-war 'anti-fascist' bourgeois consensus, popes John XXIII (1958-63) and Paul VI (1963-78) made sure they had very little to do with Opus Dei; Paul VI refused even to meet Escrivá. However, Opus Dei bided its time and meanwhile funded cardinal Karol Wojtyla's Polish archdiocese, publishing a collection of speeches he made when visiting Opus Dei centres. Subsequently, when Wojtyla went to Rome for the 1978 conclave that elected him Pope John Paul II, he repaid Opus Dei with a visit to its headquarters, praying at the tomb of Escrivá, whom he subsequently made a saint. And in 1984 John Paul II selected as his press secretary Joaquin Navarro-Valls, a lay Opus Dei numerary since 1960, who thereafter ran the Vatican press office in the manner of a papal Alistair Campbell.
Unless given permission by more senior figures, those who belong to Opus Dei are not even allowed to admit that they are members - Kelly was initially most reluctant to confirm her affiliation. Concealment and a conspiratorial atmosphere are endemic to the organisation. These people see themselves as movers and shakers responsible only to their god; in practice this means acting as the most willing servants of reaction, including as stalwarts of fascist regimes. Indeed, so reticent is the organisation that several crucial Opus Dei documents are kept secret and treated as classified: Praxis (laying down in detail how members lead their lives), Crà³nica (teaching journal), the Ceremonial book, the Internal rules for administration and the 500-question Opus Dei catechism. We learn about these documents' existence only through Opus Dei apostates.
Kelly's opposition to gay rights resulting from her membership of a fanatical organisation has long bothered some parliamentarians. In October, Lib Dems called for her resignation because she "was blocking proposals to stop religious organisations refusing services to people on grounds of their sexuality ... Westminster sources confirm there is a cabinet split on the issue, with the prime minister apparently backing exemption for faith groups" (The Guardian October 16 2006).
As readers will know, this is the second time in the space of a few weeks that Kelly has been exposed for her arrogance and hypocrisy. Earlier this month it was revealed she is using part of her £137,000 ministerial salary to send one of her children to a £15,000-a-year private school (describing itself as the only UK preparatory school whose main aim is to help children with learning difficulties pass exams for public schools such as Winchester, Eton and Harrow). This revelation came shortly after she had left a ministerial post in which she had presided over the closing of special needs places for children of parents who do not have the choices her income gives her.
Ruth Kelly, like any other citizen, has the right to practise her religion as she sees fit - so long as it does not adversely affect others or impact negatively on the way she does her job. As we have seen, her adherence to Opus Dei is a direct cause of her advocacy of and support for discrimination against a minority group. Bigots of any kind, whether religious or not, ipso facto disqualify themselves from positions that entail dealing with all sections of the population and carry with them even the slightest degree of responsibility for ensuring equal treatment. To make someone like Kelly minister for equality is a sick joke that only the likes of Blair could dream up.
As for catholic adoption agencies and the like, their insistence on the right to discriminate against gays renders them totally 'unfit for purpose', to use an expression favoured by one of Ruth Kelly's cabinet colleagues. Matters as vital as adoption must be overseen by completely impartial institutions, and should immediately be taken out of the hands of agencies that have so clearly demonstrated their unsuitability for such work.