Mystic Monday #2

I thought I'd like to begin with Therese de Lisieux, also known as Therese de l'Enfant - Jesus, or Therese, the Little Flower of Jesus.

I first read her autobiography about 4 years ago, nearly to the month.  Despite growing up in the Roman Catholic Church, I have no recollection of hearing her story before that.  But the innocence and sincerity that permeated her own reflection on her life impressed me, as well as, the measure of devotion her parents passed on to her and all her siblings.

She was born on the second of January 1873 in Normandy, the ninth child of Louis and Zelie Martin.  At this point her mother was 41 years old with failing health, considering she had 4 older siblings who died very young, as her health began to deteriorate she was sent to live with a wet-nurse until she was weaned.  At the age of three, Therese declared her intention to become a nun much to the delight of her parents who although they desired to enter religious life were unable to.  In fact, when Zelie was advised against entering the convent she asked that the Lord would make her the mother of many children, all dedicated to him.

Sadly, Zelie died in the summer of 1877.  Therese felt the loss deeply and attached herself to her older sister Pauline, her 'petite mere'.  Coming through the mourning the household continued in the pattern of a lifestyle that was devoted to both religion and piety...daily attendance at Mass, regular fasting, family prayer, religious reading, offerings and charity.

By all accounts Therese grew up doted on, even spoiled, when she entered the convent at 15 she did not know how to perform even very basic housekeeping tasks.  After the death of her mother she was mothered by her sisters and indulged by her father, particularly as he saw and encouraged his 'Little Queen's religious inclinations.  As she recalls her years growing up, it's easy to see how her personal piety made her socially awkward among her peers...she studied only for a short time in a day school, the years before and after she studied with a private tutor.  Often she was concerned about being good and acceptable, fearing hell and longing for heaven, when her two oldest sisters entered the Carmelite convent in Lisieux it's easy to understand why Therese would long to enter along with them.

For a year after her 'petite mere' entered the convent Therese suffered with an illness that kept her in bed, with severe headaches and sometimes hallucinations.  Her illness ended suddenly with a vision where a statue of Mary smiled down at Therese.  From this point Therese is increasingly convinced of her call.  Unfortunately, her father did not weather this illness well and suffered mini-strokes and bouts of depression.  However, in the end he supported Therese's desire to enter the convent, which she did at age of 15 after receiving permission by appeal all the way up the ranks of the Church hierarchy to the Pope.

Interestingly, the Carmelite Order is quite strict.  Their focus is on contemplating God and this is done by a strict schedule of prayer, fasting, silence.  Their quarters, food and clothing is simple, austere.  Rules for life are set forth and abided by.  In 1888 from a life that was religious but indulgent, Therese entered a life of austerity and toil.  And there she lived, cloistered until her death in September of 1897.

I think there are two things I want to reflect on.  One was the evident delight that Therese found in devoting herself, yielding herself completely to what she felt was the call God had on her life.  In a time when all that was expected of a woman was to marry well, bear many children and raise them, she longed for a deeper fulfillment in a profoundly spiritual experience of life.  From the start there were many trials to life in the convent, they were strictly cloistered and only spoke to those outside the convent through a grate.  And it was readily apparent that she was ill-equipped to perform the tasks assigned her; many thought her spoiled and useless and did not hesitate to inform her.  It was in the midst of this that she received a wedding invitation from a cousin and as she had just 'taken the veil' (made the life vows) she responded with characteristic delight and wrote her own wedding invitation:

God Almighty, Creator of Heaven and Earth, Sovereign Ruler of the Universe, 

and the Glorious Virgin Mary, Queen of the Heavenly Court,

announce to you the Spiritual Espousals of their August Son, Jesus, King of Kings and Lord of Lords, 

with little Therese Martin, now Princess and Lady of His Kingdoms of the Holy Childhood and the Passion, assigned to her as a dowry by, her Divine Spouse, from which Kingdoms she holds her titles of nobility -- 

of the Child Jesus and of the Holy Face.

It was not possible to invite you to the Wedding Feast which took place on the Mountain of Carmel, September 8, 1890 -- the Heavenly Court was alone admitted --

but you are requested to be present at the wedding feast which will take place tomorrow, the day of Eternity, when Jesus, the Son of God, will come in the clouds of Heaven, in the splendor of His Majesty, to judge the living and the dead.

The hour being still uncertain, you are asked to hold yourselves in readiness and watch.

(This letter is modeled after a letter that the French at the time would have sent to inform friends of the marriage of their children)

As I read this again I feel the sheer joy I assume Therese had at recognizing her Saviour as her husband.  It is not unlike the passage in Isaiah 54:5:

For your Maker is your husband-

     the LORD Almightly is his name-

     the Holy One of Israel is your Redeemer;

     he is called the God of all the earth. 

For a young woman who sees that she will not pass through the rites of passage to womanhood that her culture dictates I find it fascinating that she fashioned them to fit her own situation.  As she took her life vows she would be as a bride dressed in white wearing a traditional bridal crown of flowers...so she extended the marriage metaphor and completed the celebration with it's announcement.

I recently finished a biography of Therese that coloured much of what I had originally seen.  The biographer seemed convinced that Therese suffered from repressed emotions and was not entirely truthful about how she really felt about certain events and interactions.  She also waxed at length about the repressed rage, depression and mental illness of Therese's father.  I do not believe that Therese and her family were without normal humanity, but I hesitate to call illness, 'hysterical' and a melancholy personality, 'clinically depressed'.  It is of course important to remember that Therese wrote her autobiography in her early 20's, she died at 24; so we should expect a certain amount of naivety, simplicity and innocence.  We should take it for what it is, a picture of a young woman who desperately wanted to please her Maker, and sought Him in every way she knew and in every way she was taught.

There is a lovely teaching she called the little way.  This is some of what she said about her 'little way':

I feel that my mission is soon to begin-- my mission to make others love God as I love Him... ...it is the way of Spiritual Childhood, the way of trust and absolute self-surrender.  ...We can never have too much confidence in the Good God, He is so mighty, so merciful. 

Her little way is a way of confidence and abandonment.  Confidence is a God of great love, mercy and forgiveness, and abandonment of one's self into His care.  If I think of her as one who was coddled as a child, met God in that time and place and held onto relationship with God that looked like that of a child with a trusted parent.  Keeping this in mind, she writes reflects that perspective and makes sense... and yet it is more foreign to what I, or we, experience in this day and time.

Could any of us walk in that kind of freedom, with that kind of security... ...?

How does a child relate to a parent?  Well, if the child is sure of the parent's love and care then the child trusts and obeys...without question of the character of motivation of the parent... reckless abandonment!

Mystic Monday #1

I was thinking that I might more regularly write if I gave myself a couple of topics to visit on a consistent basis.  So here is the first topic...Mystics...

So to begin with we should probably look at what mystic means.  From the straight up dictionary definition we get something like:

   A person who claims to have attained insight into mysteries which transcend the ordinary or average through divine or spiritual revelations.

I suppose with a definition like that who could blame someone for thinking of a Eastern religion like Hinduism or Buddhism.  But I want to specifically look at those mystics from the Christian tradition.  I think to begin with I want to visit a number of women who have been are either self-professed or have been labeled as mystics.

The things that these mystics have in common is a pursuit of knowing God through Jesus Christ; which may or may not include experiences that might be considered or called supernatural or miraculous.  The other thing that becomes clear as one reads their stories is that they have experienced a transforming power that causes the mystic to walk more like Christ and in closer communion with him.

One other caveat should be mentioned and addressed.  Many of these people walked with God before the Reformation so their expression of faith may be a bit foreign to those outside the experience of the Roman Catholic, Orthodox or High-Church forms of Christianity.  As far as I commit to pursuing understanding of the history of Christian Mysticism, I will also try to glean broadly assuming that God is capable of reaching us despite of our limited human perspective.  To me this means that I am happy to set aside those things that are in my view cultural or historical constraints; and still find truth and insight for life.

Very broadly we can see a chronicle of mystical experience through the Old and New Testament.  Unfortunately, we often grow so familiar with the stories that we forget the wonder and awe that came with our first hearing of the ways that the Creator connected with his creation.

And so today you just get a few thoughts and no names to 'google'.  I want to be able to do my subject justice with little biographies and samples of writing.  If nothing else happens watch this space next Monday for the first of my introductions .

Abortion, Americans, and the Election

I suppose that this might seem like a moot point post election.  But there is a number of things that I have been mulling over regarding the Presidential Election and the candidates...particularly the choices and reasons for those choices that American Christians have been voicing.

As a Canadian my choice for President of the USA is really rather irrelevant.  However, I feel quite strongly that the US needs to do some serious work on it's global reputation in order to stem the anger and outrage that is directed her way.  And I fully believe that Barack Obama is the kind of leader that the world can respect and in fact wants to work with.

In my meanderings online, I have come across some many indictments, mainly by Christians, of Obama's position on abortion and homosexuality.  And it has got me thinking about the government's role in enforcing ethics and morality.  Interestingly, I don't think that either issue played a substantial role in the preceding Canadian elections...the most recent event that brought abortion to the table was Dr. Henry Morgentaler receiving the Order of Canada. 

I find it fascinating how government bodies choose to deal with those who object to their policies and decisions.  Dr Morgentaler blatantly disregards the laws of the land, was tried and found guilty and then...honoured...?  It makes me wonder if the KI six will one day receive the same honour...they did not harm any body.  They researched their rights, followed the rule of law and were sidelined in favour of big business.  When they enforced their rights based on law and precedent, they were arrested and jailed ...a doctor honoured for beginning the killing of unborn children...First Nation leaders shamed defending their land...but maybe this is a story for another post...

Back to the issue at hand, abortion and politics.  I stand firmly on the side of the argument that says life begins at conception and abortion is tantamount to murder.  But I faced an ethical dilemma now many years back that has pulled me back from the graceless position that makes no allowances for living in a fallen world where things go wrong.

Imagine, a young couple, entering ministry, expecting their longed for first child...but something goes badly wrong.  The baby in utero is not well and the painful journey begins.  Prayer vigils are held, fasting and long days in medical care.  The baby will not live, baby will have massive organ failure upon birth and immediately die.  The decision is made to continue on with the pregnancy in hopes of a miracle that will give them a baby.  The journey turns now to a darker path, the mommy's life is now in the balance.  She is put into hospital, continuing to hope that something might change.  Now doctors are fearing the worse, mother and child are most likely going to die before this baby gets near full term.  In the corner sits a young man facing the lose of wife and child in one catastrophic event...  ...the unspoken solution is abhorrent... In their experience abortion was never a consideration, they would happily accept a child with a disability or abnormality, they would suffer the pain of a labour to hold and farewell their stillborn child.  

I could not in good faith stand in judgement of them.  How could I condemn a man to sacrifice his wife on the altar of 'abortion is always wrong'?  I heard judgement from both ends, those angry that this man allowed his wife to be put in harms way for the sake of a child as good as dead, and those who said that no matter what the circumstances should run it's course, come what may.

When my eldest child faced certain death without immediate and expert medical intervention, we heard from both sides.  If you hadn't have gone there this would not have happened, to if you feel like you were where you were supposed to be you should have stayed and buried her there.  One one hand, we made a bad choice to go and then we made a bad choice to come back.  Circumstances allowed to run their course would have killed her, appropriate medical intervention required us to pack up and head home; even then we were not assured that she would live, just that she had a chance to live.

Even as I write this I am aware that abortions done for medical necessity are not many.  According to statistics in the US only 6% of abortions occur for health reasons, and 1% for cases where the mother was violated.  But what about those with religious affiliations ...  In the US self-identifying Protestants account for about 37% of those having abortions, another 31% call themselves Catholic.  Of these women 18% are willing to identify themselves as born-again or evangelical.  

Allowing for abortions for medical necessity and women who were violated that leaves about 229 000 babies being aborted by women who are in those same churches that have come out indicting Obama for his liberal position on abortion.  If we are more generous with the level of commitment of  men and women from non-Evangelical and Catholic churches then the Church at large becomes responsible for the abortions of nearly 900 000 babies annually.

Who are we to hold one man responsible for safeguarding the ethics of a nation when we are not the vanguard of those ethics within our outspoken and oft judgmental communities.   Somewhere the reality of the lives of men and women in our churches is not being impacted by the message being taught.

Can morality really be legislated?  Wasn't that what Jesus frequently exposed as hypocritical in most of his interactions with Pharisees?  The Pharisees were charged with cleaning the outside and leaving their inner world strewn with dead men's bones (Matt. 23:27).  Could we, the church, be in danger of being accused of the same level of hypocrisy?  Are we, as Christians, cleaning up the visible life we live and storing up inner death?

I believe that Barack Obama is just a man.  But he is a man who, in my estimation, has attempted to address issues in their complexity, who seems to have a sincere desire to reach out across social, political and economic lines and sounds prepared to engage the global community.  It is time for the American Church to come behind their secular leader and pray for him.  Not that he would become like you, or me, but that he would be well equipped for this task set before him.

At the same time we as Christians need to have our house cleaned.  Maybe there are so many secrets because we are afraid of judgment.  Maybe there are hidden wounds because we are not sure of the love and acceptance that is promised.  Is it time for a revolution within the walls of the Church that seeks to be more like Jesus?  ...more like Jesus in how we talk, more like Jesus in how we share, more like Jesus in how we work, more like Jesus in how we love?