Lord, my God, who am I that You should forsake me? The Child of your Love–and now become as the most hated one–the one–You have thrown away as unwanted–unloved. I call, I cling, I want–and there is no One to answer–no One on Whom I can cling–no, No One.–Alone … Where is my Faith–even deep down right in there is nothing, but emptiness & darkness–My God–how painful is this unknown pain–I have no Faith–I dare not utter the words & thoughts that crowd in my heart–& make me suffer untold agony.
So many unanswered questions live within me afraid to uncover them–because of the blasphemy–If there be God –please forgive me–When I try to raise my thoughts to Heaven–there is such convicting emptiness that those very thoughts return like sharp knives & hurt my very soul.–I am told God loves me–and yet the reality of darkness & coldness & emptiness is so great that nothing touches my soul. Did I make a mistake in surrendering blindly to the Call of the Sacred Heart?
–[By Mother Teresa] ADDRESSED TO JESUS, AT THE SUGGESTION OF A CONFESSOR, UNDATED [Link]
<
p>Upon her death in 1997 it was revealed that Mother Teresa had asked that her private letters and confessions to her confessors (apparently she went from one to the next like a person in search of the right therapist) be burned so that they would never see the light of day. The Church, probably recognizing Teresa’s importance as the holiest woman in the world, overruled her request. They were also aware that any surviving notes or correspondence might be a useful part of the background investigation needed for her potential Sainthood (which there now is). Those letters have finally been revealed to the public in a new book titled Mother Teresa: Come Be My Light. They are so startling in their rawness that many are now wondering if anyone really knew Mother Teresa. Time Magazine has a great dissection of the revelations in the book and indicates how Teresa might now become a saint to both the faithful and those who don’t believe in God.
On Dec. 11, 1979, Mother Teresa, the “Saint of the Gutters,” went to Oslo. Dressed in her signature blue-bordered sari and shod in sandals despite below-zero temperatures, the former Agnes Bojaxhiu received that ultimate worldly accolade, the Nobel Peace Prize. In her acceptance lecture, Teresa, whose Missionaries of Charity had grown from a one-woman folly in Calcutta in 1948 into a global beacon of self-abnegating care, delivered the kind of message the world had come to expect from her. “It is not enough for us to say, ‘I love God, but I do not love my neighbor,'” she said, since in dying on the Cross, God had “[made] himself the hungry one–the naked one–the homeless one.” Jesus’ hunger, she said, is what “you and I must find” and alleviate…Yet less than three months earlier, in a letter to a spiritual confidant, the Rev. Michael van der Peet, that is only now being made public, she wrote with weary familiarity of a different Christ, an absent one. “Jesus has a very special love for you,” she assured Van der Peet. “[But] as for me, the silence and the emptiness is so great, that I look and do not see,–Listen and do not hear–the tongue moves [in prayer] but does not speak … I want you to pray for me–that I let Him have [a] free hand…” [Link]
<
p>Reading some of her confessions was deeply moving. It seems that the more success that Mother Teresa saw in her work in Calcutta, the darker and emptier her soul became, and the farther she drifted from the light of her God’s love. Far from being a “Saint of the Gutters,” she seems to use the perpetual darkness within her to drive her forward like some sort of “Queen of the Dammed.” Some theologians in the Time article use an analogy that describes her as a jilted lover who still carries a torch for a man (Christ) who she knows is never coming home to her.
How can you assume the lover’s ardor when he no longer grants you his voice, his touch, his very presence?… [Link]
<
p>As you can imagine, these letters are a gold mine for theologians, atheists, psychologists, Nihilists, Existentialists, etc.
Psychologists have long recognized that people of a certain personality type are conflicted about their high achievement and find ways to punish themselves. Gottlieb notes that Teresa’s ambitions for her ministry were tremendous. Both he and Kolodiejchuk are fascinated by her statement, “I want to love Jesus as he has never been loved before.” Remarks the priest: “That’s a kind of daring thing to say.” Yet her letters are full of inner conflict about her accomplishments. Rather than simply giving all credit to God, Gottlieb observes, she agonizes incessantly that “any taking credit for her accomplishments–if only internally–is sinful” and hence, perhaps, requires a price to be paid. A mild secular analog, he says, might be an executive who commits a horrific social gaffe at the instant of a crucial promotion. For Teresa, “an occasion for a modicum of joy initiated a significant quantity of misery,” and her subsequent successes led her to perpetuate it. [Link]
<
p>That last bit I highlighted has similarities to Hinduism, especially in the Gita where Krishna continually warns Arjun that even ill thoughts may result in bad karma. The central themes found in Teresa’s writings remind me a lot of some poetry by another “saint.” Especially her references to the dark night within her soul.
A night full of talking that hurts
my worst held-back secrets. Everything
has to do with loving and not loving.
This night will pass.
Then we have work to do.-Jelaluddin Rumi
<
p>
It was when Mother Teresa finally accepted that the darkness would never leave her that she embraced it:
I can’t express in words–the gratitude I owe you for your kindness to me–for the first time in … years–I have come to love the darkness–for I believe now that it is part of a very, very small part of Jesus’ darkness & pain on earth. You have taught me to accept it [as] a ‘spiritual side of your work’ as you wrote–Today really I felt a deep joy–that Jesus can’t go anymore through the agony–but that He wants to go through it in me.
–TO NEUNER, CIRCA 1961… [Link]
Of all of the quotes included in the Time article, the following one touched me the most. Although she did not realize it, what she was actually saying mirrored the central idea found in the Bodhicharyavatara, written by 8th century Indian scholar Shantideva:
“If I ever become a Saint–I will surely be one of ‘darkness.’ I will continually be absent from Heaven–to [light] the light of those in darkness on earth,” she wrote in 1962. [Link]<
p>Theologically, this is a bit odd since most orthodox Christianity defines heaven as God’s eternal presence and doesn’t really provide for regular no-shows at the heavenly feast. [Link]
Compare this to the idea of a Bodhisattva:
Another common conception of the bodhisattva is one who delays his own entering into Nirvana in order to save all sentient beings out of his enormous compassion. He is on a mission to liberate all sentient beings, and only then will he rest in his own enlightenment. [Link]
<
p>
It begs the question, was Teresa really a Mahayana Buddhist at heart? It shows you how human thought can ultimately converge on some universal themes.
<
p>
But really, we shouldn’t know any of this:
Please destroy any letters or anything I have written.
–TO PICACHY, APRIL 1959… [Link]
will you marry me!
Abhi: Thanks for publishing this story. My own take on it was the following:
I wonder what the motive was in publishing these letters which Mother Teresa wanted burnt. Also, what will they do to her impending sainthood? Perhaps now, in addition to being the “Saint of the Gutters,” she has also earned the right to be the “Saint of Skeptics.”
Wonderful story.
Part of me wonders why her torment is being picked apart in this rather abstract fashion. It’s not hard to imagine that a young girl who leaves her family at 18 to live in an alien culture, who does not marry or have her own family, who grows into an icon held in awe, who, on top of all of this, strives constantly for one thing, union with God – it’s not hard to imagine that a person like this would be exceptionally isolated – no matter how many people surrounded her. The idolization made things worse, from the sounds of things. If you look at her quotes, it is striking how often she talks of the disease of loneliness, the sense of being unwanted, unloved, and ‘forgotten by everybody’. How many people loved her for herself? For her quirks? Knew her mistakes, her frailties? How many people saw into her, past the iconic status?
Abhi,
Very interesting revelations. In some strange way – it makes her more real. And, also shows how any level of evolved spiritual thought asks for questioning rather than blind faith. I also really liked the way you tied her thoughts with other ways of thinking be it Sufi or Buddhist. Indeed we seem to have more in common than we think in navigating this human experience. Very thoughtful post…..
It shows you how human thought can ultimately converge on some universal themes
yeah, i think this is true. i think all religions probably harbor particular “flavors” of belief, so that in many ways devotional catholicism has a lot more in common with bhatki than either does with a thomistic theologian or an advaita sage.
I think this ‘convergence’ is rooted in the way the species evolved (biologically) and has nothing to do with religion. As Richard Dawkins asserts, ethics, morals and philosophy do not come out of religion, rather the converse true: religion vaguely attempts to model itself into some kind of an authority on these issues and people often (wrongly) assume these things arise out of ‘religion’.
I think this ‘convergence’ is rooted in the way the species evolved (biologically) and has nothing to do with religion.
see pascal’s boyer’s religion explained for a naturalistic exposition (he is one of dawkin’s sources in the god delusion). but yes, it is probably correct to say that ethics and philosophy are prior to religion.
btw, i do think it is possible that the claims of religion make it more likely that people like mother theresa will engage in extreme altruism. the converse of that is that i think religious certitude also enables those who are evil to commit their acts with a relative clean conscience (e.g., “i am doing god’s work, he’ll sort it out….”). to use a mathematical analogy i think that religion (or some other ideology, communism for example) just increases the magnitude of the preexisting vector.
Tut…tut; Razib for a change that’s not psychobabble; simply babble.
[deleted by admin]
That kind of faith is “wobbly” only to the uninitiated.
If you spend significant time with mystics, saints or spiritual aspirants you find that there relationship with “God” is often like that of a lover to her beloved — love, happiness, joy, anger, pain, resentment, sadness, depression, etc all factor in. These are sign of a very deep inticacy, not of a wobbly faith.
You can choose to interpret it that way but in her own words she had a wobbly faith bordering on atheism.
Yes, but do all religions increase (or decrease) the magnitude of good & evil in a similar fashion? I don’t think so.
Yes, but do all religions increase (or decrease) the magnitude of good & evil in a similar fashion? I don’t think so.
depends on your definition of good and evil. and it depends on their definition of good and evil.
A sign of humility.
If you read the writings of renowned saints and spiritualists, they all claim like that. It’s an emptying of the heart, a part of the process of spiritual progress, not regression.
While people will praise them, “oh you have such love for the Lord”, they will think they have none.
Humility.
I’m with Razib’s commentary, except I don’t necessarily see Mother Teresa as an extreme altruist. Making oneself the preeminent icon of extreme alturuism may be more an egoist than an altruist act. Extreme altruists are probably those people you never heard of.
Extreme altruists are probably those people you never heard of.
i recall the case of an irish american businessmen who donated hundreds of millions anonymously? anyone else remember this? after he died some journalists dug into records and figured out that he was the donor.
anyway, re: altruism, well, it is easy to argue that nothing is altruistic if you measure in the currency of satisfaction.
Maybe, maybe not.
But Ma Theresa never wanted to become big and world famous. In fact, she fought against that, but the more you push yourself to the back out of humility, the more the universe tends to pull you forward. On the other hand, those who push themselves too aggressively forward find that the are pulled back.
There is also a big difference between getting your hands dirty and working one on one with the needy than just writing a big donation check. She dedicated all of her time and energy to helping people. She did not live comfortably.
Wow.
I admire her all the more, because even with these heavy doubts, she never gave up on her faith. As one who has given up, I am in awe of her humility, her spirituality, her strength in spite of her feelings. I’m very moved, thanks for posting this …
I disagree. I think religion is just irrelevant to the natural instinct for altruism. (assuming you aren’t referring to being good for the fear of god, as a form of altruism)
Also, that first sentence you wrote reeks of condescension. In fact, I find it surprising that one would say that on this post – because, if anything, the above post only shows that she is NOT the type of a person who does things solely for religious/godly reasons.
But see, that’s just it in my view. She DID give up on her faith. She then used the darkness left behind in the absence of that faith to drive her forward.
Great post, Abhi.
You know I find it entirely fascinating how some commenters on this thread are doing EXACTLY what the church hoped they would do when this bombshell dropped (I’m not judging those commenters though). You have to ask yourself, why would the church not do everything in its power to keep hidden the fact that Teresa stopped believing in God for a large portion of her life? Parts of the Time article comments on some likely outcomes. The reason is simple and to me seems grounded in human psychology. When shown proof positive that Teresa lost her faith, others here admire her for keeping her faith. What they are really doing is holding on to their own by projecting on to her something that wasn’t there.
“Theresa Ma Fan” you keep alluding to “mystics” but can you name a few in particular? Most either believe in God but live ascetic lives, or else don’t believe in God but rather a Universal Soul type thing. Rumi, who I quoted, is the archetypal mystic but believed completely in God. Here is a woman that is monotheistic but has given up on her God. You are convoluting several different types of devotion I think.
Great post, Abhi. I just read the article on Friday and thought Anna will post something on this story. I agree with DQ’s analysis. Mother Theresa always sort of elaborated on loneliness. I think she used absence of faith and presence of loneliness to drive herself forward.
But Abhi, she speaks to an absent Christ, not a non-existent one. She suffers from her abandonment by, not the death of, God.
Ivan in the Brothers Karamazov really gives up his faith. He’s unable to reconcile his faithlessness with his personal virtues, and furthermore, becomes entirely doubtful of his own fundamental goodness. He tries to save his brother, but has no faith in even that action. He has a total breakdown, which makes sense.
Good point DQ but reading through all the quotes, to me it seemed she fluctuated between absent and non-existent and, were in not for the dozens of confessors that kept pulling her back, would have settled on non-existent.
That is just plain euphemism/politeness/humility. I don’t think one should go out of their way and play with words just to give explanations like that…
.
Really? I thought it was a very good statement in that it clearly contrasts the two views people will have of these letters.
besides, what exactly is the point of god if he ‘abandons’ someone like mother teresa, while ‘existing’ in the background all the while π
No, I referred to Mother Teresa, not DQ (regarding the politeness, euphemism, humility, etc.)
I can see how you came to that conclusion and fair enough, this is all very open to interpretation and reinterpretation. It’s easy to see how both sides are going to read it up however they want to.
Oddly enough, I have no faith (and technically should be batting for the atheist side, except that I find both Hitchen’s and Dawkin’s arrogant and wilfully antagonistic atheism as equally abhorrent as some religious “leaders”) and yet my reading is that she still did, go figure …
The point is that what your wrote above is EXACTLY what was supposed to have happened to Christ on the cross when he was crucified. God “abandoned” him and existed only in the background. By going through the same thing Teresa could keep her faith even while she suffered because she would be following Christ’s example. However, if God is non-existent then that is another story altogether. She suffers for no reason then.
oh well, I guess there is some logic there, afterall π
look, as an atheist a lot of the god-talk is pretty unintelligible and incoherent from the get-go. but, it moves people nonetheless, that’s concrete and real. the psychology of other human beings is not the same psychology as your own, and that’s something that seems to be coming out in the comments. i’m agnostic on whether this woman “believed in god” because those words aren’t that easy to unpack across world views….
Also, that first sentence you wrote reeks of condescension. In fact, I find it surprising that one would say that on this post – because, if anything, the above post only shows that she is NOT the type of a person who does things solely for religious/godly reasons.
hey, i’m not a psychic like you who can read her thoughts. mother theresa is just a human animal to me, and i analyze her through the lens of the typical human animal. i don’t condescend because i’m an animal too. also, you’re putting words into my mouth, but i’ll leave it be (hope i don’t sound too condscending).
Theresa Ma Fan, I agree with you. It’s a sign of humility all mystics have expressed, including St. Augustine, St. Francis of Assisi, Thomas Kempis, Mirabai, the gopi’s of Vrindavan (though they probably didn’t write about it), Kabir, and Swami Vivekananda, though he was not what’s normally considered a mystic. Jean de Caussade also wrote much about the struggle, or test, of faith that all true spiritual aspirants are put to, for God wants to know your love for him is real. All of the above have expressed a relationship of Love with God.
Abhi, I don’t think God abandoned Christ. Christ chose to follow God’s will. He surrendered to God’s will. That is a sign of his faith in God.
People will have to read the book to get a even a glimmer at what Ma Theresa was going through, and the real sublte stuff of her heart/mind/soul/psyche could probably not be given words at all, and just stayed inside her. All of the aspirants mentioned by hello above also expressed similar sentiments, and I have read similar in almost every “spiritual” treatise I have ever read.
God or the Universal Spirit, or whatever, allows a glimpse, a feeling of itself and then withdraws it. This hide and seek game can go on for years and years.
I’m a bit uncomfortable with all of this. To me the wishes of the dead are so sacred, it’s disturbing that they would be overruled, even by the Catholic church; that they did so makes my chest hurt and upsets me the most, out of everything I am about to express. If I may state a general point, I am also sorrowful that some will seize upon this revelation of humility which was never meant to be published, and use it for their own purposes.
I would hope that people can continue to tread respectfully, because for some of us, Christianity is the central focus of our life…it’s bizarre to hear those who are not Christian dissecting things like Christ’s crucifixion. I would never claim to grok what Krishna was telling Arjun. But we are all different. And my lamenting that the greatest modern manifestation of Christianity in India is now going to be undermined won’t do any good.
Perhaps I am a little sensitive, because I go out of my way to respect other religions, when it seems like the same respect is often not extended to mine in this space (a recent comment on the Aviyal thread about Christianity upset me so much, I wrote an as-yet-unpublished post about it). I’m just sincerely sad that this discourse is occurring, because I think it’s the last thing she’d want to be known for. She deserves a legacy of service, not sensationalism.
Thanks so much for writing on this story- although there is a sense of guilt in knowing that these words weren’t meant to be read, I respect Mother Teresa on a completely different level now. I think this confirms more than ever that she is truly a woman of the people as she indirectly pledges her allegiance to those in need before God himself. Just to be up front, I am not Christian so I am not speaking from my personal experience with faith, but rather from Mother Teresa’s perceived one.
It is clear she was a tortured being, but I think the point here is she struggled with several specific themes that she knew could not be resolved within her own faith (from her standpoint). In the face of her missionary work and through the all the suffering she had seen, she truly searched within every aspect of her Catholic faith and couldn’t find a way to reconcile the pain. The conflict within her is clearly a reflection of not knowing how to provide spiritual guidance to those who desire answers most, when she could not truthfully understand why God has allowed for such a degree of suffering to continue. Of course, outwardly, she continued to operate under the Catholic beliefs she spent her existence centered around. However, I think her struggles came from a feeling that she could not let the masses down when so much was expected of her and when she wanted to continue to do so much good for them.
The first thought that crossed my mind when reading the original article was exactly what Abhi touched on- there are marked signs that she has delved into Hindu and Buddhist philosophies. Her writings express so much of the logic, guilt, self-doubt, acceptance and quest for true humility that overrun those religions, yet what makes her writings all the more reflective of them is her ability to admit questioning God’s presence in a truly philosophical manner. And yet, she found no solace in any attempts to reconcile her thoughts, which many other Catholic and Christian leaders did eventually find.
I can’t help but wonder how she might have reacted if she were still alive when these confessions leaked. Would she have admitted her doubts and perhaps even been so radical as to abandon her faith to the world? I realize they are bold questions to be asking, but I truly do feel for her and respect her more than ever for not blindly finding a way to reason with herself when she clearly was not sure of her relationship with God.
Which is why I put “abandoned” in quotes.
I subscribe to TIME, too. There are some things which actually affect or upset me so much, I can’t post about them. I try, struggle and give up. While my faith is something that I sometimes discuss here, I don’t reveal more than what I am comfortable with, especially wrt something so personal.
Besides, I didn’t really think my reaction to this would be what this community wanted as a starting point for a very provocative discussion, nor did I want to deny someone else in the bunker the chance to post about it, when I’m given the freedom to post about Sikhism, Islam and everything else. Christian posts don’t have to be blogged by Christian bloggers. π I think Abhi’s write-up is far more in line with the “She wasn’t all that we thought”-epiphany which the world is taken by and in some unfortunate cases, gloating over.
But Anna, one of the most powerful points I got out of the article is how little this all has to do with Christianity. As you point out however, it might ultimately be used that way. This was more about the relationship between one woman and her ideas of God (or the lack thereof), ideas that share a striking resemblance to the central beliefs of other faiths. Comparative religion and discussing (or “dissecting”) the finer points of religions are a great way to understand what connects and divides us all because everyone can bring some understanding to the table.
Quite the opposite in truth. NOW I can actually relate to her.
Abhi, this affects me the way an innocent attempt at humor by Cicatrix riles up the Sri Lankans. π I can’t think straight…or gay for that matter
Oh, I think we can ALL relate to her more now. I’m not saying you were gloating or anything of the kind…you wouldn’t believe what my inbox looks like. π Everyone has something to say about this, and unlike your careful and considerate post, not everyone is as thoughtful.
But the people who think like that are the same ones who are not well read in mystic or spiritual auto-biographical literature, and have probably not had any exposure to hardcore, uber focused aspirants on a mystical/meditative path. Anyone who has had that exposure would be able to relate to Ma Theresa’s words and would think, “ah, she is just what we thought”.
Just when I thought Hitchens would have only one best seller, he gets lucky. I am sure we will see Hitchens go at it in the days to come.
From the original article,
On Dec. 11, 1979, Mother Teresa, the ΓΒ’Γ’βˆ βSaint of the Gutters,ΓΒ’Γ’βΒ¬ΓΒ went to Oslo
I am sure kolkata is happy to hear that.
Dear Anna,
Did you consider for a moment that some of us actually think that she was perhaps MORE than what “all that we thought” in light of this revelation? (please see my comment #2) And why is this a slap against Christianity rather than looking askance at unquestioning faith of any stripe?
As Abhi pointed out in #23, this story is going to be interpreted by all according to their own predilections. I do however believe that more than the triumphalism on the part of skeptics, who saw her humanity above her divinity in the first place, it is the believers who are going to be see Mother Teresa’s struggles as a truly momentous event. Many will see her pain about being “abandoned” by god as an equivalent of being “abandoned” by Mother Teresa. But none of what we or she believed, undermines what she did on behalf of the truly “abandoned.”
Interesting that you should say this because as I was reading this, I was thinking to myself that MT could have benefited from an basic understanding of Buddhist philosophy. I agree that her intent is bodhisattva-like but given the confusion and chaos in her mind, it would be a case of the blind leading the blind. From what I know, the Bodhisattva has attained enlightenment but has stayed on earth, out of compassion for all living beings, to lead them to enlightenment.
Ruchira, I am not attacking anyone who has commented here. I have considered nothing. Please don’t assume that I am doing anything other than responding sincerely, about my own reactions and observations.
If I feel like it’s bit of a slap, I just do. As I stated earlier, when it comes to my faith, I don’t feel like I owe anyone a public post about the thoughts which are closest to my heart. And I’ll repeat myself, in case anyone didn’t pick it up the first time– what upsets me most is that her wishes were overruled. I think that is inexcusable.
Take my word for it, there are few people on SM that have had more “exposure to hardcore, uber focused aspirants on a mystical/meditative path” than me. π