God and Eros - St. Teresa of Avila and St. John of the Cross

  • Thread starter Thread starter NKaloms
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
N

NKaloms

Guest
After asking my theology teacher some questions the other day. He told me to read some things written by the Saints; specifically, St. Teresa of Avila and St. John of the Cross.

While reading some of their works I came across something that I had remember reading once before, but put it out of my head because it made me feel uncomfortable. Seeing it again now I would like to ask for some answers.

God loves us passionately, even erotically in a sense. Why exactly is God seen as masculine and the soul as feminine? I don’t know why but its extremely weird and uncomfortable for me as a guy. I understand that it is not supposed to be taken literally, but even Saint Teresa of Avila had “erotic” experiences with God. God of Desire | Catholic Answers

As I search deeper into my Catholic Faith, certain things bug me and stick in me like thorns. It also doesn’t help to have such division between Catholics, ie. those who support Pope Francis, those who don’t. Those who adhere to Church teaching, those who don’t. ect. ect. I am really confused and am wrestling with some things right now. I appreciate those who took the time and effort to answer my last post, and I hope you can help me with this one as well. Thanks - NKaloms.
 
This terminology of love and even erotic language is part of the mystical path. It´s NOT about physical love, but “drowning in love” (or light, in some mystic traditions) is a way to connect with good. Selfless Love is seen as a way to feel the holy spirit and meet Jesus, but it´s not opposite to the legal part of the christian doctrine, it´s a way of training and expressing originally found in the monastic area, so without lustful temptation. Both Theresa of Avila and John of the Cross were classic mystical leaders in the history of the chruch. Another one, Berhard of Clairveaux, made clear in his talks to his mink brothers that feeling god´s love is a way to feel joy in the hard monastic life. The terminology of love and even lust comes from the mediavel Minnesang, a court-based form of literature that was very popular. Its all about love and longing, and many grat nuns and monks were from the nobility class and familiar with this way of writing, it influenced christian mystic literature as well. If tis feels strange for you, try out maybe some more basic texts to give you an overview about the terminology.
It´s not made for a life within worldly temptation, not originally, so if it´s leading you away to sinful or uncomfortable thought it´s not your way, this is not bad.
 
Last edited:
Somebody else just posted essentially the exact same thread a week or two ago.
As the poster said above, this is a cultural difference between our lives and way of expressing ourselves today, and what was done back then.

There are plenty of saints to choose from if you cannot relate well to these. I’d suggest reading up on some that were more modern and closer to your cultural understanding of “manly”.
 
NKaloms said:
After asking my theology teacher some questions the other day. He told me to read some things written by the Saints; specifically, St. Teresa of Avila and St. John of the Cross.
Click to expand...
Awesome choices. And they knew each other.
While reading some of their works I came across something that I had remember reading once before, but put it out of my head because it made me feel uncomfortable. Seeing it again now I would like to ask for some answers.

God loves us passionately, even erotically in a sense. Why exactly is God seen as masculine and the soul as feminine?
Click to expand...
I don’t know.
I don’t know why but its extremely weird and uncomfortable for me as a guy.
Click to expand...
I know. Despite the name I use, I’m a guy. Here’s the funny thing. Science claims that biologically, we all begin as girls. Ain’t that a kick in the head?
WATCH: We were once all female - ScienceAlert
WATCH: We Were Once All Female
Jun 18, 2015 - It may come as a surprise to some of our male readers, but you all actually started out as females - physically and phenotypically speaking.
Click to expand...
I understand that it is not supposed to be taken literally, but even Saint Teresa of Avila had “erotic” experiences with God. God of Desire | Catholic Answers
Click to expand...
St. John of the Cross also had them and called them “love darts”. I think the idea is that the closest thing we can associate to that feeling, is a love between a man and woman. Indeed, our relationship to God is depicted as a marriage.
As I search deeper into my Catholic Faith, certain things bug me and stick in me like thorns. It also doesn’t help to have such division between Catholics, ie. those who support Pope Francis, those who don’t. Those who adhere to Church teaching, those who don’t. ect. ect. I am really confused and am wrestling with some things right now. I appreciate those who took the time and effort to answer my last post, and I hope you can help me with this one as well. Thanks - NKaloms.
Click to expand...
[/QUOTE]
Best thing is to focus on Jesus. Jesus established a Church. Listen to that Church and to the Pope. Don’t let the rebels confuse you.
 
Eros is not the same thing as sexual love. Eros is the longing to be subsumed into another person – to lose oneself in the other, and vice versa. Because we are embodied persons, it’s hard for us to understand that in any non-bodily way, and that’s why the mystics often say things that might make us uncomfortable. This is in the Scriptures, too. Consider this psalm:
O God, you are my God; earnestly I seek you;
my soul thirsts for you;
my flesh faints for you,
as in a dry and weary land where there is no water.
2 So I have looked upon you in the sanctuary,
beholding your power and glory.
3 Because your steadfast love is better than life,
my lips will praise you.
4 So I will bless you as long as I live;
in your name I will lift up my hands.
5 My soul will be satisfied as with fat and rich food,
and my mouth will praise you with joyful lips,
6 when I remember you upon my bed,
and meditate on you in the watches of the night;
7 for you have been my help,
and in the shadow of your wings I will sing for joy.
8 My soul clings to you;
your right hand upholds me.
Click to expand...
See all the references to touch and the body? I think we make a mistake if we take these for sexual, but they certainly have to do with eros: with the desire for complete unity with the beloved. I would encourage you to consider that this sort of unity is in fact what God wants with us in Heaven. That doesn’t mean you have to feel comfortable with it now, but you should realize that the metaphor is talking about intimacy, not sex.
 
@NKaloms s

John of the Cross is pretty advanced as far as saintly writers go. I’m not going to pit you against your theology teacher but if you haven’t done much saintly reading then I would start - in my opinion - with something like St Augustine’s ‘Confessions’ or St Francis de Sales’ ‘Introduction to a Devout Life’. I don’t know how much you resonate right now with the female intellect but St Therese of Liseaux’s ‘Story of a Soul’ is also incredible, but you will find a few passages that are allegorical to a romance / wedding with Christ.

Allegory to romance is something you are going to find from time to time. As human beings on Earth, we can’t fully (not even close) experience the fire of the Beatific Vision, so it can be compared in earthly substitutes. Nuns sometimes associated their vows with wedding vows. St Bonaventure & others serenaded the Blessed Virgin with song. The actual union of heavenly things is indescribably more intimate. But failing being able to understand it, we use descriptors such as parent and child, or husband and bride.

If something is uncomfortable to you right now I wouldn’t stew over it too much. After gaining knowledge & experiences & overall maturity after X number of years, you might come back to something and find that you appreciate it in a way that you didn’t before. If something is uncomfortable right now, that’s okay.

And as far as the Holy Father, I wouldn’t get wrapped up in any of those conversations because it is damaging to your spiritual life. I think he is an extraordinary individual but that is neither here nor there. Pray for him and for his office and trust in the Holy Spirit.
 
Last edited:
Let’s look at how sexual relations are supposed to be.

The sex act is the act that is perhaps most like mimicking God. In love, we give our all to the other person, and in this, create life.
 
That’s not true. That’s a misunderstanding of human biology. I think you’re misunderstanding that we develop our sex organs later on in development, but this has nothing to do with being male or female though. Sex is determined by chromosomes. At the moment of conception, we are either male or female, we may not develop male or female traits until later in development, but its all about the genes.

I don’t like the idea of a “marriage” between God and me, at least if I’m the “feminine” part of that marriage.
 
I understand what you’re saying; but can you expand upon the whole “subsumed” part? I don’t like the idea of being “subsumed” into another. I wish to retain my individualism.
 
But that’s part of the problem, the cultural differences between “manliness”. There is only one “manliness”, the Catholic version, other types of “manliness” will only fall short of what God’s definition of it is.
 
I think you are mistaken. God doesn’t create human definitions. God wants you to be a moral person and follow his commandments (Moses’ 10 and Jesus’ 2, as discussed and presented in the Catholic Catechism ). As long as you are doing that, God could not care less if you relate to him in old Spanish culture borderline-erotic metaphors, or in some modern way.
 
It can be a real surprise when people stumble upon the “spicy” passages in mystical literature.
But be at peace–there are many forms of spirituality within Catholicism and if this doesn’t work for you, try one that does.
And understanding history and cultural history helps us understand where people were “at” when they wrote the things they did.
 
What do you mean by the “Catholic definition of ‘manliness’”? Is there a Catholic definition of ‘manliness’?
 
NKaloms said:
I understand what you’re saying; but can you expand upon the whole “subsumed” part? I don’t like the idea of being “subsumed” into another. I wish to retain my individualism.
Click to expand...
Diversity is no obstacle to unity, in a heavenly context. You will always be your own person, but the desire to be “separate”, to have any aspect of yourself “off limits” to God, is a desire that you will be cleansed of. In the oneness of relationship with the Lord, your individuality is an irreplaceable good, but your individuality is perfected in a relationship with God in which God shares everything with you and you share everything with God. (And yes, this sounds a lot like romance; hence the metaphor. Although as Paul cautions, marriage is a metaphor for our relationship with God, not the other way round.)
 
It’s not a human definition. God created us, male and female. God created a Church that shows us what being male and female means. After the fall of Rome, the Catholic Church taught many of the barbarians Christianity and “civilized” them. One of the key elements was how the family was ordered. Manliness isn’t a human definition; different cultures may have different meanings, but God has taught us the truest form through Jesus Christ and subsequently, the Church teaches us that.
 
Of course. Here: https://www.ewtn.com/library/FATHERS/GOODPIZA.HTM

Being a man, or “manhood” means reflecting what Jesus did and how he acted. Being a man means to love in a masculine way, as in - giving. A husband gives his wife love, a son gives his elders respect, and so forth.
Commonly associated traits are those of strength (physical, mental, intelligence) and courage, contrasting with those of women. This is not to say that women do not have these traits, it only means that these traits are masculine ones.
 
That is a definition of manliness, but not the Catholic definition of manliness. Beyond the call to lay down your life, there is no Catholic definition of manliness. It will look different to each of us depending on how God calls you.
 
NKaloms said:
God loves us passionately, even erotically in a sense. Why exactly is God seen as masculine and the soul as feminine? I don’t know why but its extremely weird and uncomfortable for me as a guy.
Click to expand...
I’ve heard it said that eros is most like God’s feelings toward us.

C.S. Lewis, In one of the final chapters of Perelandra, says this:
“At all events what Ransom saw at that moment was the real meaning of gender. Everyone must sometimes have wondered why in nearly all tongues certain inanimate objects are masculine and others feminine. What is masculine about a mountain or feminine about certain trees? Ransom has cured me of believing that this is a purely morphological phenomenon, depending on the form of the word. Still less is gender an imaginative extension of sex. Our ancestors did not make mountains masculine because they projected male characteristics into them. The real process is the reverse. Gender is a reality, and a more fundamental reality than sex. Sex is, in fact, merely the adaptation to organic life of a fundamental polarity which divides all created beings. Female sex is simply one of the things that have feminine gender, there are many others, and Masculine and Feminine meet us on planes of reality where male and female would be simply meaningless. Masculine is not attenuated male, nor feminine attenuated female. On the contrary, the male and female of organic creatures are rather faint and blurred reflections of masculine and feminine. Their reproductive functions, their differences in strength and size, partly exhibit, but partly also confuse and misrepresent,the real polarity.”

And although men are masculine in relation to women, Mankind is feminine in relationship to God. We are, after all, intended to be a part of Christ’s Bride.
 
Last edited:
This whole giant point you’re making about gender is really far afield from what I and another poster or two were trying to say about historical and cultural expression, and I am not sure what point you’re trying to make or what your issue is. John of the Cross was not engaging in any sort of gender bending, so it baffles me how this even came up.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top