"In January 1897 she wrote: "I do not believe in eternal life. It seems to me that after this mortal life there is nothing more. I cannot convey to you the darkness into which I am plunged." "

This talk from our most dedicated Religious is disturbing and telling. Mother Teresa said the same. My own parish priest, whom I admire greatly, once choked back tears as he revealed that not once in his long ministry did he ever witness any sort of miraculous intervention from God. The great Catholic faith was nothing more than the day to day duty of practicing christian virtue, which although important, was entirely natural. Sigh.

I think there is a serious disconnect between theology, which depicts God as a constantly active and close Being, and reality, in which God is almost never intervening. That gap between theory and reality is a depressing one for many people. So, even if God intervened through the prophets and Jesus long ago in amazing ways, we are stuck with the natural course of life with some very good teachings thrown in to make it more bearable.

But it must be a major let down for Religious to devote so much heart and soul in their idealism and then face the silent reality that God doesn't interact in tangible ways with creatures. We are left redefining Nature as God so that we can credit sun and rain and crops and such as God's miraculous hands, when that's clearly not the amazing experience of God that is presented to us by the prophets and Jesus Himself.

How simple her little way was, how proud we are.
Thank you for reminding us of her love of the Lord.

What a beautiful piece.

My mother has a special devotion to St. Therese. Her and my father tried to have children for 7 years after their marriage. Nothing. Then she asked St. Therese to pray for them.

She then became pregnant, and before she even knew she was pregnant, she saw a few rose petals on the windowsill of her apartment in the Bronx in the middle of winter.

The following summer I was born, during the month of roses.

There were to be no more children, but after seven years of infertility, her prayers were answered.

>My own parish priest, whom I admire greatly, once choked back tears as he revealed that not once in his long ministry did he ever witness any sort of miraculous intervention from God. The great Catholic faith was nothing more than the day to day duty of practicing christian virtue, which although important, was entirely natural<

In my humble opinion, this previous post completely misses the point. If people's lives being radically changed from selfishness and sinfulness into virtue and communion with God is not considered by her as God's intervention, then I don't know what could it be. To label this change as "entirely natural", is something that would need to be proven. People simply don't change their lifestyle overnight simply by an act of their will. Certainly the argument about her parish priest not seeing this radical change in someone during his "long ministry", is not convincing at all. I for one happen to see people being changed by the sacraments in the Catholic Church, all the time.
And by the way, I don't know any Catholic that takes "the sun and rain and crops" as a miraculous act from God. That is blatantly a straw man fallacy.

This is an excellent article, getting right to the point.

And I like what Elizabeth Hayes says about the absence of God. I believe this experience of forsakenness is closely associated with the mystery of the Cross. Very few of us can face that mystery head-on. What a terrible event it was. How the Blessed Mother survived it is an equal mystery. The vast majority of us are fortunate never to have to really confront it.

I'd like to make two comments about the article above. First, about the Christmas eve that was life-changing for Therese. The change was precipitated by a casual remark made by her father that suddenly made Therese see her life in a new perspective. Up until that moment she had been somewhat at odds with her sister Celine. On that Christmas eve the barrier fell away and they became "like one soul." Something really profound had happened. It is really awesome.

Second, in his magnificent bio of Therese, John Beevers made an extremely perceptive remark. Therese had been ordered to write down her earlier life. When her sister, Marie, also a Carmelite read the account, completed within two short days, she was absolutely astounded. She saw at once that Therese had ascended to the very heights of spirituality. The little piece was a highly condensed and perfectly integrated expression of a soul completely possessed by God. There was not a false note or step in it. I see this as the best testimony to her uniqueness and depth.

I strongly recommend Beevers' latest bio of Therese. It is beautifully written and profoundly perceptive. It gives food for almost endless thought.

Elizabeth, I think you miss one major point with both Saint Therese and Mother Teresa about their spirtitual darkness, that being: how their faith still remained. No doubt it was difficult, but they still were faithful. Instead of looking at this as a punishment, I look at this as something God allows for his most faithful. For most of us we will never acheive this state. I know God rewards me with little "candies" on a constant basis, I think this must be because I am still a little child in my faith. I need them to be reassured. This was not the case for these very faithful servants. St. Therese's story is not only moving but has such purpose to our lives. Not all of us have big important jobs, or big influential roles in society. How comforting to know everything we do and everything we say can be a prayer for Jesus, an offering to him. I hope and pray you can see the positive and beauty in this story rather than sadness. May God Bless you.

Actually, Therese herself experienced these "little candies” before her terrible experience of forsakenness, which she surmounted as she had everything else. Therese said from experience she came to believe God is directly involved in the smallest moments of our lives, always aware, always responsive. That seems to be contradicted by her later experience of forsakenness. As I said earlier, I believe most of us are lucky in never getting to that point. We can view God as both intensely present yet entirely absent--and both experiences are legitimate. I think this question revolves around the mystery of the Cross, a mystery almost impossible to confront head-on, and maybe God doesn't expect most of us to do it.

Elizabeth:

I remember after Mother Teresa's letters became public, Christopher Hitchens wrote an article (I believe it was for Time or Newsweek) in which he concluded, based upon the expressions of doubt in some of her writings, that she was, in fact, an atheist. I have always found that conclusion somewhat absurd in light of the fact that the creator of the Church that she devoted her life to had once cried out, "My God, my God, why have you forsaken me." Was He an atheist as well?

With regard to your parish priest, I think he should remember two things. First, the fact that he did not witness a miraculous intervention during his priesthood does not mean that miraculous interventions related to his priesthood did not occur. How can he know in this life the impact his words and actions have had on others? How can he know in this life the impact some of his parishioners, inspired by his words and actions, have had on the lives of people your parish priest never met?

Second, I think miraculous interventions usually do not look the way we expect them to look. Your parish priest may have been expecting to see weeping statues or inexplicable images on the wall of the church, but the miraculous interventions were actually the father sitting in the back of the church who finally decided to stop drinking and become the man his family needs, or the pregnant teenager sitting near the door who decides to keep her baby. Nothing spectacular in the Hollywood sense, but still spectacular.

"I think miraculous interventions usually do not look the way we expect them to look."

But we get those expectations from scripture and various documented rare miracles in Church history. Unfortunately, less than one percent of humans that have ever lived have experienced a true miracle, and for people like Mother Teresa and Therese who "give it all," the lack of experiential divine intervention becomes soul crushing.

I agree that seeing people change from evil to good is wonderful and *central* to what the faith is about. But that's not so much miraculous as just natural education in Christian virtue and morality. It's going from ignorance on moral things to educated on moral things, and seeing the value of love vs. the damaging effects of sins.

I constantly have to answer the great questions of my kids about this radical shift from an experiential God to a non-experiential one. The problem is rooted in the reality that God only intervened a few times in history (the prophets, Jesus and the apostles). But everyone else lives natural lives--albeit lives that are enhanced by the education provided during those rare and brief intersections between heaven and earth.

But the rareness of those interventions compared against the high expectation of intervention is why Terese and Mother Teresa became deeply disappointed. They gave all for a God who has only intervened miraculously a few times in history. That's a hard pill to swallow for us all, much less for great people like Mother Teresa who took on the most difficult job in the world.

This little dialogue is fun.

Eliz, you said this: "But the rareness of those interventions compared against the high expectation of intervention is why Terese and Mother Teresa became deeply disappointed. They gave all for a God who has only intervened miraculously a few times in history. That's a hard pill to swallow for us all, much less for great people like Mother Teresa who took on the most difficult job in the world."

I think you're dead wrong about much of this. I doubt Therese or Mother Theresa had high expectations of intervention in the way you say. Neither were they "deeply disappointed." God is always "intervening"--that's Catholic doctrine--but rarely in a directly empirical (to us) way. That's why we need faith. The EXPERIENCE of forsakenness was only that, an experience. It did not necessarily reflect the reality. These experiences were GIFTS intended to bring them into inconceivable unity with the divine heart. Neither of them objected. Its arguable that Mother Theresa could not have accomplished what she did under any other conditions.

I personally believe I have received direct answers to prayers. But I know the time may come when I seem to receive none and God may even seem absent--even non-existent. But the subjective experience tells us nothing about the reality.

The real question we should be asking, perhaps, is that if suffering and abandonment are so common, what does Christian faith bring to a life? Isn't that why so many are not interested? The Cross at first is a tremendous obstacle. Not just a paradox but a seeming contradiction. What kind of God would require such a thing? Don't shy away from the question. This God must be radically different from what we would have thought. The Cross is a statement about God. But what does it say? Don't be too quick with an answer. Few Christians have ever come to grips with it.

Bob,

I think your analysis is pretty much right on. Jesus spoke of picking up your cross and carrying it even before he pick up his. To give oneself entirely, joyfully, and humbly is where we struggle. When Jesus cried out I always believed that was his moment of not only physically being human but emotionally. For that brief moment, he probably was most like "us". He felt the anguish that we can feel sometimes. To me I find that comforting. He knows our pain. He has experience both happiness and sadness here on earth and maybe a moment of feeling abandon like we do sometimes. The cross is all about sacrifice. Just like Jesus, if we connect our cross with his, our cross has value, rather than just a tragedy. The key is losing ourself to Jesus. Both Mother Theresa and St. Therese became "Jesus" in everything they did. Did their human nature sometimes overcome them briefly, yes, but just momentarily like Jesus. But their faith prevailed in the long run. I thank you for the information on the book of St. Therese. I look forward to purchasing it and reading it.

I disagree that Saints like St Therese or Mother Teresa were 'disappointed' in God and realized that He is inactive in our lives... I think what happened is they just went through really dark times where they shared in Christ's abandonment on the Cross and felt like God is no longer there. However, they still had faith... and I think in the end they realized that He never actually left them, that all these thoughts were temptations and tests. During her illness, St Therese went through a terrible 'dark night of the soul' where she felt that there is no Heaven..this was probably a very strong feeling, but we can see that in the end she still had her faith and still loved God; when the trial was over. I think the Saints knew that God IS very much active in our lives...they saw that He is active even during these 'dark nights', though the soul does not perceive Him at the time. Many of these Saints also saw miraculous things happen in their lives, for example St Therese saw Our Lady and was cured by her...

God bless

Elizabeth:

The miracles we see described in the Gospels were not just superhuman feats to wow the locals.

They were also not just utilitarian acts meant to address a material problem. In other words, Jesus did not perform the miracle of the loaves and fishes just because people were hungry, he did not turn water into wine just to make sure the wedding did not get ruined, and he did not calm the storm simply to save Peter's fishing boat.

All of those miracles have a much deeper symbolic meaning, often tied into the Old Testament and/or symbolic of the New Covenant Christ was creating.

Do not put too much emphasis on the miraculous acts themselves. Remember, the people who witnessed those miracles eventually turned on or abandoned Christ. The deeper meaning of the miracles is what is important, and that meaning is still as powerful and life-altering now as it was 2,000 years ago.

I don't want to lightly dismiss the comments here, but I'm wondering if you have really read the statements of disbelief by Therese and others. I don't advise it, because those candid moments are so candid and honest that they might shake you. I have read some of them, and I conclude that the lack of supernatural intervention in life by God shakes even the best of us. We want to have prayers answered and we want to see God act in supernatural concrete ways, but when He doesn't over the course of one's lifetime, it can really cause doubt---especially among the ones who are doing their best to please Him, like Mother Teresa.

Anyway, I'm not here to force deep reflection on the topic, but there is plenty of worrisome reflection for those who expect God to be an intervening God. Personally, I am convinced that God has in fact intervened into the natural-physical realm on behalf of men about a few dozen times in history. No offense, but most claims of the supernatural here in this comments section wouldn't pass biblical muster or Church scrutiny. But I don't see any benefit to go there.

Elizabeth,
To say that God has interacted in the world just a few dozen times in history for the sake of mankind is simply not true.
I think your interpretation of God's intervention is very specific. If it isn't some grand miracle, than it isn't significant. It is obvious you have read some saint stories, there is so many saint stories that portray the kind of significant miracles you might be looking for. Healings, apparitions, stigmatas. To some these might be significant, but Brian English expressed the unseen miracles. These miracles might be more significant than anyone can realize. They touch so many people in so many ways. Simplicity is sometimes the most powerful tool. What Bob G. said about the cross is very powerful. Sacrifice and giving oneself entirely to Jesus is essential. St. Therese's whole life was about Jesus, everything she did was for Jesus, Every word, every prayer, and every action was offered to Jesus. Her cross was the lack of receiving the Holy Eucharist, her lack of feeling the love of Jesus in her life at the last few years of her life. Although it was difficult, and she felt abandon just as Jesus did, she never gave up her faith. That is faith. To have that kind of faith is surely something we all want. One of my particular crosses that I have to carry is very difficult. Not much has change in the last several years to rectify this situation. Do I think God has abandon me? Absolutely not. Through prayer and especially the Holy Rosary and the Blessed Mother's intercession, I have been able to deal with my cross with more grace than I did without prayer. I have an inner peace that was not there before. The pain still remains, but through God, I can endure.

I was captivated by your last words about the cross you have had to carry for several years, and I sympathize. I carried what I considered a similar kind of cross for over 40 years. Any secular-minded person would have said my quest to escape it was futile. Yet it clearly and definitively was removed in one moment and it has never returned. Why not earlier? I do not know. My life would have been entirely different if it had been removed earlier. But I believe I can guarantee this: keep praying to have it removed if that is what you really want, have faith and one day it will be taken away, completely. Why not earlier? Who knows? Just keep asking and believing and all will turn out for the best. I wish I could help you.

Laurie,

I think it is accurate to say God has interacted a few dozen (say 30-50) times. Now, I'm counting Moses as one, even though Moses did many miracles. I'm counting Jesus as one, even though Jesus did many miracles. Fatima appears to have strong backing as one. The Shroud, even if it originated in the 1300s, is still a miracle-produced image, no question about it. So that's one. There may be others, and then there are very convincing ones associated with the canonized saints, although those are harder to know for sure due to limited medical knowledge.

So yes, I am being quite specific about intervention. I don't think scripture or tradition documents any such notion as "unseen miracles." Those things are just natural good outcomes, but they happen according to the natural course of events, not by an intervention by God. Moreover, those normal outcomes are natural ones that take place in everyone's life. (For example: not everyone in a serious car accident dies, but that doesn't mean the people who recover had a "miracle." Rather, they just recovered by normal natural means. Those good outcomes are nice, but they are not miracles.)

With all that in mind, you see that miracles are rare, and in fact most humans that have ever lived have never experienced God in any supernatural sense. And I'm suggesting that this reality has been especially hard on those saints who have sacrificed themselves so fully for their highly difficult, highly challenging vocations. I'm pretty sure Mother Teresa had this precise let down. She saw so much suffering in her hospitals, and even a handful of miracle healings would have gone a long way, I suspect. To the best of my knowledge, she never saw any miracle cures of any of those poor people she served. I know I'd be disappointed in that overwhelming situation.

Elizabeth,
I guess we have to choose to disagree. Before a saint becomes a saint, they must have three miracles that must be validated by the Catholic Church that are perform through the prayful intercession of these saints. The Church wouldn't have any documented Saints if your theory held. I once heard Father Corapi describe Mother Theresa as no longer being "Mother Theresa" she never put the word "I "into her conversation in the last few years. It was always Jesus helped the poor, Jesus did this or that. Just like St. Therese she surrender completely to God, despite her dark nights. The message of the bible at least in my opinion is not about the great and powerful God and all the miracles he can perform, it is about love, sacrifice, surrender to God and his son. In regards to the unseen miracles, the Gospel of John says at the end of his gospel that Jesus performed many other miracles, too many to mention. I know in my family that miracles have taken place, small miracles at first, but they have had profound effects on all of us for many years that have followed. I am not sure anything or anyone can convince you that Jesus is always there for us, even in our darkest hours. I think that is where faith has to take over. May God Bless you.

Thank you Bob G. for your kind words and concerns. I appreciate your own personal story. Your words about your own heavy cross and the eventual removal of it is very comforting.
It is funny, but if it wasn't for this cross in my life, I would have never turned to God in such a deep manner. So in one sense, I look at this cross as a gift. I never want to be the person I was before this cross was given to me. May God Bless you and once again, thank you.

"I'm pretty sure Mother Teresa had this precise let down. She saw so much suffering in her hospitals, and even a handful of miracle healings would have gone a long way, I suspect. To the best of my knowledge, she never saw any miracle cures of any of those poor people she served. I know I'd be disappointed in that overwhelming situation."

This statement gets to the heart of the problem with relying on miracles to validate your faith. That approach ignores the fact that we are not here on earth to allow God to prove Himself to us; we are here so that we can prove ourselves to God.

This idea that God should be Superman, regularly zooming in to save the day with some spectalur feat, also ignores the fact that the entire concept of Free Will would be destroyed if miracles, in the strictest sense, were common occurrences in everyone's life.

Finally, it is ironic that Mother Teresa and the Little Flower felt tormented by not seeing instances of God's intervention in the world. Actually, all they had to do was look in the mirror. Such women could hardly be considered natural occurrences in the world. Saints are, by definition, interventions by God in our world.

Brian,

People tend to expect at least occasional miracles from the Christian God, and without any our experience of God is, well, just natural and education-based. The problem is that one can't read the history of God without seeing that God at times made himself known through *objective* miracles. Yet, God has left only His law and morals for most of us, which although great, is still natural and educational.

The expectation of "spectacular feats" is not something humans invented in their own minds. Rather, scripture and some aspects of tradition create that hope and expectation, and anyone who has taught the faith to their children knows that kids ask about this all the time. "Why doesn't God do that stuff today like we read in the scripture?" is a common question from our kids, and if we're honest we realize that it's a bit disappointing that God is not more experiential in the objective miraculous ways shown in scripture.

I don't think free will would be destroyed by more frequent miracles.

I agree with you that Mother Teresa and Little Flower were amazing people, but I disagree that they were "miracles" in the supernatural sense of the word. And I think it is clear that they expressed their own disappointment that God was not a regularly intervening God in the miraculous objective sense. I think we can all sympathize with that, but I doubt we feel the frustration of it in the depth that Mother Teresa did, given her extraordinarily difficult vocation.

More common miracles would just be the flip-side of militant atheists starting to get taken out by lightning bolts. The concept of faith would disappear.

Jesus spoke about this very issue: "Have you come to believe because you have seen me? Blessed are those who have not seen and have believed." The footnote to this verse in the New American Bible explains: "This verse is a beatitude on future generations; faith, not sight, matters."

My children are young, 10, 7 and 6, but I do not recall any of them ever asking why God doesn't have objective miracles occurring on a more frequent basis. They are much more interested in the concept of Heaven and what is going to happen when Jesus returns.

I suppose the reason we are talking past each other on this is because I see the miracles themselves as being peripheral to the points Christ was trying to make. Healing someone who was physically crippled was symbolic of Christ's far more powerful ability to heal spiritual cripples. Restoring sight to the physically blind was a shadow of His power to cure spirtual blindness. Raising a dead body was a physical manifestation of His power to resurrect dead souls.

Finally, I think saying that Mother Teresa and the Little Flower were "amazing people" is an incredible understatement. They were unique manifestations of God's love in the world. Perhaps they were too humble to think of themselves that way, so they did not see that God was actually intervening in the world through them.

Brian, the miracles were not at all peripheral. Rather, they were the *objective proof* of God's intervention into history and of Heaven's authorship and endorsement of the Judeo-Christian religion. Without the miracles in real history, the Christian religion is as as invalid as the mythological Zeus. For example, it was crucial that the apostles were "eyewitnesses" of the miracle of the Resurrection. That miracle is so crucial, that St. Paul admits that all Christianity would be invalid if the resurrection was not an objective fact.

Miracles matter. They are not just teaching tools.

Jesus himself was the objective proof of God's intervention in history. By being born into the world as a man, God entered time and history.

The Resurrection actually cuts against your belief that miracles should still be occurring to provide objective proof of God's existence.

Christ only rose from the dead once. The Resurrection was never capable of being repeated so that future generations could have objective proof of God's intervention in the world.

Elizabeth I have been enjoying thinking this all through with you. Thank you for witnessing to your own spiritual struggle here: your love amid the darkness and willingness to immerse yourself in the carmelites' darkness of soul can be a valuable charism for our Church. Please be sure to drink the full measure of these saints' counsel in staying always close to the sacramental presence of our Lord and remember that is the ordinary means by which the Church opens her arc of grace to all of us. I imagine, however, that I am preaching to an adept though.

Have you nourished your charism with the French theological novels that seem not to answer but to witness to humanity's perpetual feeling of abandonment in this fallen world? I keep returning to "Star of Satan" ("Sous le soleil de satan") of Bernanos, and his other works and anything by Mauriac. Theirs is a vision that I think we need to re-appropriate for this age that so hungers for AUTHENTICITY without knowing how to recognize it. Take care.

None of us are likely to witness a true supernatural miracle in our lifetimes however the supernatural existence of God is I think very present in prayer. An answered prayer can be dismissed as a natural happening. Claps of thunder, bolts of lightning or miraculous apparations rarely accompany the answered prayer, however the fact that we experience the answered prayer or at least realize that it was heard, is a supernatural phenomena.
For example,as a 12 year old boy I remember praying fervently for an outcome. The prayer was very focused and I had no reservations about the integrity or virtue of the request. It seemed entirely reasonable and I had concluded that beseeching the almighty was the only way to make it happen. I was otherwise powerless.
To my profound schock the prayer was answered,exactly as requested, the very next day. Looking back, as an adult, I realize that the prayer was actually quite frivolous, but it didn't seem that way at the time. What God did was send me a clear message at this young age- that he was listening, thus cementing my faith forever. I think it was my determined faith in the sureness of his ability to deliver the goods, that achieved the outcome.
I won't call this event a miracle as nothing miraculous happened. The 12 year old girl class mate, that I had a major crush on, was simply not moved from my table to another table, as had been announced the day before, as part of a general seating re-organization. Thus thanks to divine intervention my happy little seating situation was left unchanged.