T
TrueLight
Guest
The Book of her Life is actually very good. It’s an autobiography.
- Status
I
Incomplete
Guest
Thank you. I’m heading to a bookstore (online) and will check that one out as well.
T
TrueLight
Guest
So I am finished reading Volume 1 of The Collected Works of St Theresa of Avila and I am blown away.
Today, I had some time to kill between morning mass and vespers and I just sat in a beautiful dimmed church, finished the last few pages of the book then sat quietly thinking about our Lord.
Should I move on to Volume II, which contains Way of Perfection, Interior Castle, and Meditations on the Song of Songs. or read some of St John of the Cross?
Today, I had some time to kill between morning mass and vespers and I just sat in a beautiful dimmed church, finished the last few pages of the book then sat quietly thinking about our Lord.
Should I move on to Volume II, which contains Way of Perfection, Interior Castle, and Meditations on the Song of Songs. or read some of St John of the Cross?
C
choliks
Guest
Hi TL,
Would you be so kind to share with us the reflections or thoughts you had during and after reading Volume 1?
I
Incomplete
Guest
I second that request.Hi TL,
Would you be so kind to share with us the reflections or thoughts you had during and after reading Volume 1?
T
TrueLight
Guest
Okay I’ll try, but it is so deep, I’m not sure I can. Here are some thoughts I had about St Teresa herself after reading book of her life:Hi TL,
Would you be so kind to share with us the reflections or thoughts you had during and after reading Volume 1?
- Very outspoken but extremely humble. She would say in prayer that she hopes she wasn’t being too bold with God.
- She never forgot the sins she committed during her early years as a nun and how she didn’t take a relationship with God seriously enough
- she was very obedient to her superiors
- had an intense love for God.
- Although she had a deep relationship with Christ, she constantly doubted that the raptures she experienced as from him.
- she constantly referred to her life here as her exile because she yearned to be with the Lord.
- What else should we want but union with God? We can be united to God even if we have secular things we must take care of.
- daily prayer is paramount
I
Incomplete
Guest
Thank you. I especially like the part about her life here as exile, and the thoughts on contemplative prayer.
You’re right about trying to sum up what she says, especially on a message board. She’s too deep to express well.
J
JReducation
Guest
Go to Way of Perfection and then go over to Mother Teresa. You will be blown away at the parallels.
This is the summary of Teresian detachement from herself. While she was outspoken, she was not confrontational. Just the opposite. She was polite, humble and at times even funny. She had a way of saying things without offending and she avoided giving offense and taking offense. She was not a person who was easily offended, because she did not take herself too seriously.
Her obedience is very Benedictine. We go back to that same point, obey everything but sin, even when it seems like a foolish thing to do. She did many things that she thought were foolish. However, she was very funny. She would tell her nuns that the spiritual director wanted her to do such and such. Then she would add something like, “I have no idea why, because it makes no sense.” When the nuns asked her, “So, what are you going to do?” She would look at them in surprise and say, “I’m going to do what I was told to do. Now don’t ask me more silly questions.”
Teresa embraced poverty. She understood that you cannot love God and those things that distract you from him. She limited herself only to what she needed to do God’s will. In her relationships, she was very generous with her time and talent, because it pleased God. This giving of her time and talent is also a form of poverty. You arrive at a space where you do not own your time and talent. God owns it and God can claim it whenever he wants to do so. He always does it through another. If you truly love God, you not only detach from the material, but also from the abstract, which is harder. All too often we value our time too much and we appreciate our talents to the point that we forget that they are a gift from God, through us, for others.
Fraternally,
Br. JR, OSF :christmastree1:
I
Incomplete
Guest
I loved all of this, but the above lines are especially quotable! Good to remember on those days when I am frustrated at getting no time for myself.
It’s not MY time!
C
CatholicFireman
Guest
I’ve always loved St. Teresa of Avila, especially since I went to St. Teresa of Avila Church (Queens) and school during my 7th and 8th grades. More importantly, she lead me to St. John of the Cross. They had an amazing relationship.
More importantly, she lead me to St. John of the Cross. They had an amazing relationship.
T
TrueLight
Guest
Yes, I left out a big part, “the poverty part”. She always felt that the Lord wanted her enclosed nuns to not have an income and she struggled with indecision, due to others telling her the houses should receive income, but felt that it was wrong.
J
JReducation
Guest
Actually, there is a problem in the translation from Spanish to English. The term income in Spanish does not mean the same as it does in English. They wanted her houses to live off charity. That’s the income of which she speaks. She did not want this. There was a reason for this. This is where the whole laity and religious conflict began.
At that time in history and the Council of Trent (1563) there was a major problem between the religious and the laity. The religious depended on the laity for their livelihood. Every house has a brother or a sister who would go out and beg. Many houses, such as the Carmelites, had very wealthy friends who donated land, money and other things that the religious needed.
However, many of these folks felt that the religious should be accountable to them. In other words, they wanted to know how the religious speny their donations. It often went as far as manipulation. Those who gave bigger donations would ask for special favors, such as having a daughter made prioress or a son made abbot, etc. The bishops did not help matters. When the religious refused, the bishops would intervene and force them to comply, because the bishops did not want to assume the financial burden for these religious. In a sense they had a good reason to feel this way. There were too many religious and the dioceses did not have enough revenue.
Teresa wanted her nuns to be poor. They were not to own their houses or anything in them. They were not to have much in them either. But she wanted her nuns to pay rent for their houses. The question was how to get the rent money without being indebted to their benefactors.
Finally, between 1560 and 1563, the Council of Trent ruled that certain religious orders were exempt from the control of the laity and the bishops and that they did not have to be accountable to them, but the bishop had to protect them and the laity had to finance their apostolate. This is called the Right of Exemption.
This was not granted to women religious, only to men. However, since the Carmelite nuns were under the jurisdiction of the Carmelite Friars, they were protected by default. This settled part of the problem for Teresa. Her nuns would be free from the intervention of their benefactors. Now, how to get benefactors who would donate the rent money while agreeing not to expect anything in return, other than a promise of prayers and a thank you?
Regardless of what Trent said, human nature is human nature. The benefactors still wanted something in return for their money, if nothing else an accounting, which the Church said that they were not entitled to have. All accounting was to be given to the pope, hence the term Pontifical Right.
Poor Teresa was in a tough situation; but God always came through and someone would give them money with no agenda and without expecting anything in return. It was then that Teresa banned the organ from her houses, because it was an expensive item for a group of people who had to pay rent for their house. She introduced the use of the guitar in worship. Teresa started the folk mass thing.
Just kidding about the folk mass . . . before I get tomatoes thrown at me.
Teresa needed income and wanted income, but she wanted it without strings attached. This was very hard, because that’s not how people operated then. How to open these houses without income or how to get income without conditions. There was no place else to turn except to Divine Providence. Mother Teresa went through the exact same thing.
Fraternally,
Br. JR, OSF :christmastree1:
T
TrueLight
Guest
Thanks for explaining that.Actually, there is a problem in the translation from Spanish to English. The term income in Spanish does not mean the same as it does in English. They wanted her houses to live off charity. That’s the income of which she speaks. She did not want this. There was a reason for this. This is where the whole laity and religious conflict began.
At that time in history and the Council of Trent (1563) there was a major problem between the religious and the laity. The religious depended on the laity for their livelihood. Every house has a brother or a sister who would go out and beg. Many houses, such as the Carmelites, had very wealthy friends who donated land, money and other things that the religious needed.
However, many of these folks felt that the religious should be accountable to them. In other words, they wanted to know how the religious speny their donations. It often went as far as manipulation. Those who gave bigger donations would ask for special favors, such as having a daughter made prioress or a son made abbot, etc. The bishops did not help matters. When the religious refused, the bishops would intervene and force them to comply, because the bishops did not want to assume the financial burden for these religious. In a sense they had a good reason to feel this way. There were too many religious and the dioceses did not have enough revenue.
Teresa wanted her nuns to be poor. They were not to own their houses or anything in them. They were not to have much in them either. But she wanted her nuns to pay rent for their houses. The question was how to get the rent money without being indebted to their benefactors.
Finally, between 1560 and 1563, the Council of Trent ruled that certain religious orders were exempt from the control of the laity and the bishops and that they did not have to be accountable to them, but the bishop had to protect them and the laity had to finance their apostolate. This is called the Right of Exemption.
This was not granted to women religious, only to men. However, since the Carmelite nuns were under the jurisdiction of the Carmelite Friars, they were protected by default. This settled part of the problem for Teresa. Her nuns would be free from the intervention of their benefactors. Now, how to get benefactors who would donate the rent money while agreeing not to expect anything in return, other than a promise of prayers and a thank you?
Regardless of what Trent said, human nature is human nature. The benefactors still wanted something in return for their money, if nothing else an accounting, which the Church said that they were not entitled to have. All accounting was to be given to the pope, hence the term Pontifical Right.
Poor Teresa was in a tough situation; but God always came through and someone would give them money with no agenda and without expecting anything in return. It was then that Teresa banned the organ from her houses, because it was an expensive item for a group of people who had to pay rent for their house. She introduced the use of the guitar in worship. Teresa started the folk mass thing.
Just kidding about the folk mass . . . before I get tomatoes thrown at me.
Teresa needed income and wanted income, but she wanted it without strings attached. This was very hard, because that’s not how people operated then. How to open these houses without income or how to get income without conditions. There was no place else to turn except to Divine Providence. Mother Teresa went through the exact same thing.
Fraternally,
Br. JR, OSF :christmastree1:
I
Incomplete
Guest
I second the thanks. I’ve been learning a lot!Thanks for explaining that.
J
JReducation
Guest
Thanks for explaining that.
You’re both welcome. I hate to admit this, but I did my doctoral dissertation was a theological analysis on human nature using the insight into poverty of Francis of Assisi and Teresa of Avila.
I’ve sort of cheated here. Spiritual Theology and Psychiatry are my passions. The reason that I mention this is because as I studied the different spiritual masters and wrote my dissertation, which is now obsolete, I discovered that Teresa was wrong.
She said that all things change, but God. I would add that human nature is pretty static too. There were 300 years between Francis and Teresa, people still couldn’t part with a single penny unless they got something in return. There are 500 years, give or take, between Teresa and us. What has changed?
Human beings have yet to learn the meaning of giving until it hurts without expecting anything in this life.
Fraternally,
Br. JR, OSF :christmastree1:
I
Incomplete
Guest
Your conclusion is so very true! But people like Teresa, who ask us too, give us the opportunity to grow in holiness.
C
choliks
Guest
But Bro. JR, I would contend that human nature has the capability not to be static. Sts. Francis and Therese (and all the other Saints for that matter) were the proof. Hehe.
J
JReducation
Guest
Teresa was a true anthropologist. If you read what she wrote and what was written about her, she truly understood human nature, social systems, including human politics and best of all, he understood the male animal.
What she understood was that God is unchanging, because he’s not on a journey. He’s not going anywhere. He is an eternal present. He is perfection, not on his way to perfection. When you read Way of Perfection, she will show you how man is static by his choice, not by design. Man is meant to travel along the journey to perfection. He chooses to remain in his comfort zone, even if it destroys him.
As he stays in his comfort zone, he weighs himself down with things, with relationships that lead no where good, with aspirations for things that pass, with regrets for what he would have done if he had known, rather than doing what he knows and man weighs himself down with his own prejudices, fears, attachments, opinions. As long as we remain attached to our things, people, places, opinions, regrets, resentment, and fears, we are not poor. Our arms are so full, that we can’t embrace Christ in others, much less extend our arms to join him on the cross.
Man is static by choice, not by Divine Design.
Fraternally,
Br. JR, OSF :christmastree1:
J
JReducation
Guest
But Bro. JR, I would contend that human nature has the capability not to be static. Sts. Francis and Therese (and all the other Saints for that matter) were the proof. Hehe.
You beat me to it, because your explanation is shorter than mine.
Fraternally,
Br. JR, OSF :christmastree1:
I
Incomplete
Guest
You give so much to think about. You obviously learned well. So mind if I ask, have you found a good way to apply all of this, to not be static? I get the point about attachment, but applying it is difficult for me.
- Status