Were you not satisfied with the replies to criticism in the Wikipedia article on Opus Dei: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opus_Dei#Replies_to_criticism
John Allen, Jr., Vittorio Messori, Patrice de Plunkett, Catholic journalists who did separate studies on Opus Dei, contend that Opus Dei has been falsely maligned. John L. Allen, Jr. explained this view by saying: “There are two Opus Deis: an Opus Dei of myth and an Opus Dei of reality,” since he perceived that Opus Dei members generally practice what they preach.
Allen says “Opus Dei cannot be called secretive.” Accusations of secrecy, he says, stem from mistakenly equating its members with monks and expecting members to behave as clerics. Instead, its lay members, like any normal professional, are ultimately responsible for their personal actions, and do not externally represent the prelature which provides them spiritual training. Opus Dei itself, he says, provides abundant information. To explain the celibate lifestyle of numeraries and their relationship with their family, supporters quote Jesus’s comment that “He who loves his father or mother more than me is not worthy of me”. Catholic officials say that church authorities have even greater control of Opus Dei now that its head is a prelate appointed by the Pope and they argue members are “even more conscious of belonging to the Church”.
Supporters deny that support of Franco during the Spanish Civil War was unique to Opus Dei. As John L. Allen, Jr. observed: “it’s worth noting that in the context of the Spanish Civil War, in which anticlerical Republican forces killed 13 bishops, 4,000 diocesan priests, 2,000 male religious, and 300 nuns, virtually every group and layer of life in the Catholic Church in Spain was ‘pro-Franco’.” He said that at the end of Franco’s regime, Opus Dei members were 50-50 for and against Franco.  Peter Berglar, a German historian and Opus Dei member, argued that connecting Opus Dei with the Franco government is a “gross slander,” because there were notable members of Opus Dei who were vocal critics of the Franco Regime. Similarly Álvaro del Portillo, the former Prelate of Opus Dei, said that any claims that Escrivá supported Hitler were “a patent falsehood,” that were part of “a slanderous campaign”. He and others have stated that Escriva condemned Hitler as a “rogue”, a “racist” and a “tyrant”.  Allen said that Escriva was staunchly non-political, and repeatedly stressed that freedom is an essential element of Opus Dei. He said that Escriva’s relatively quick canonization does not have anything to do with power but with improvements in procedures and John Paul II’s decision to make Escriva’s sanctity and message known. (see Opus Dei and politics)
Supporters of Opus Dei have also questioned the motives and reliability of some critics. Sociologists like Bryan R. Wilson point out that some former members of any religious group may have psychological or emotional motivations to criticize their former groups, and they claim that such individuals are prone to create fictitious “atrocity stories” which have no basis in reality. Many supporters of Opus Dei have expressed the belief that the criticisms of Opus Dei stem from a generalized disapproval of spirituality, Christianity, or Catholicism. Expressing this sentiment, one Opus Dei member, Julian Cardinal Herranz, stated “Opus Dei has become a victim of Christianophobia.” Massimo Introvigne, a sociologist, argues that critics employ the term “cult” in order to intentionally stigmatize Opus Dei because “they cannot tolerate ‘the return to religion’ of the secularized society”.
On liberation theology, check this out too: cesnur.org/2005/mi_94.htm