[[Hi Sister Laurel, I have a question that may not be something you want to deal with. It's about Pope Saint John Paul II and the relationship he had with a Polish woman over about 32 years. I understand this was mainly a relationship via correspondence, and they never were involved physically or sexually with one another, but there was a very real intimacy. My question is, where does this put John Paul II in terms of his commitment to celibacy? Wouldn't this be a violation, or even an act of adultery?]]
Thanks for your questions. First, I think this topic is something I could respond to on the basis of my own life as a professed religious and my commitment to consecrated celibacy. Where I cannot respond is on the nature of the relationship between JPII and the woman correspondent. While I have read a couple of articles on these letters, I don't know what they actually contain, or the degree and kind of intimacy they involve. I believe only one side of the correspondence has been made public, or at least "known" in any case. Beyond that, I don't know enough about Anna-Teresa's life to speak about the propriety of these letters or the prudence of continuing the correspondence. She was married, but I don't know the quality or nature of her relationship with her husband, nor do I have any idea how her relationship with JPII affected this relationship or the ability of either husband or wife to live their vows. What I can speak to, however, is the propriety of intimate, loving friendships between religious who are vowed to chastity in celibacy and those of another gender.
Remember that vows of chastity in celibacy are not merely or even primarily about not participating in genital activity and not having sexual relations with others. They are about learning to love in the fullness of one's manliness or womanliness,
though without genital expression or (strictly) sexual activity. God, of course, is primary in this kind of learning, but healthy, loving relationships with both men and women are important as well.
Chastity in celibacy fosters a kind of availability to others, and provides a focused context in which one can grow in one's humanity, a humanity which is either uniquely manly or womanly; one really does need to be in some relationship with those of the opposite sex for such growth. Yes, these need to be truly chaste relationships (as is true for anyone, no matter their state of life),
but they, and everything about them, will always be touched by the participants' fundamental womanliness or manliness.
Sexuality is that profound and pervasive a reality. Whatever we do in the spirit of this human reality will be an expression and reflection of our fundamental womanliness or manliness. That includes living a chaste and celibate life.
The possibility of genuinely manly and womanly lives that are capable of loving one another profoundly without falling into lust or moving to genital activity is something Christianity recognizes throughout its history. We have many examples of religious men and women in relationships of intimate friendship. Two of the most famous are St Francis de Sales and St Jane de Chantal, and St Francis of Assisi and St Clare. St Aelred of Rievaulx wrote once about the nature of such profound relationships when he said, "You and I are here, and I hope that Christ is between us as a third." That pretty well captures the nature of relationships known as "anamcara" (soul friends) with roots in both Celtic and Desert Abba and Amma traditions. The New Testament speaks of friendship with God, or of the beloved disciple who rests his head upon Christ's breast, and the fact that that disciple is unnamed allows and even calls each of us to imagine ourselves in precisely that kind of profound friendship. (The Gospel of the day is about this call to profound friendship!) It is intimate, and sexual (manly or womanly) without being genital or leading there. Meanwhile, Jesus' most loving friends and followers included women who bathed his feet in their tears out of love and grief, or sat at his feet just listening when that position was traditionally appropriate for male disciples only. We are happy to "spiritualize" these relationships (where "spiritualize" really seems to mean to be made physically and emotionally risk-free), but look again at how they truly reveal a profoundly embodied love and deep friendship! Both spirituality and sexuality imply embodiedness.
As human beings, we are created by the choices we make. Even more, we are made truly human by the choices we make to love one another intimately, authentically, and in Christ -- or, by those choices we make refusing to love in this way. Every one of us is morally bound to love chastely, whether we are married, single, consecrated, or ordained. But the emphasis in that sentence is LOVE, not chastely, because all authentic love will be chaste. Some of us embrace chastity in celibacy for the sake of the Kingdom of God, and that Kingdom is where God is sovereign and authentic love is modelled in this state by those given first of all to God. Our consecrated celibacy is embraced to allow both profound love of God and our neighbors; it is embraced to make that love more widely accessible in our world through its public nature and ministry. Nothing in any of this suggests that celibate love, rooted in God and the deep womanliness or manliness of those professed in this way, cannot exist between males and females like Pope Saint John Paul II and Anna Teresa Tiemieniecka. Just the opposite, in fact. Such relationships can lead those sharing in them to an ever-deepening relationship with God and greater compassion for others. Hence, Rievaulx's famous quotation above from his work, Spiritual Friendship.
There is no circumstance related to a commitment to celibacy that makes such a relationship
necessarily a transgression of one's vows or commitments. In fact, those of us bound by such public vows often have known profound heterosexual
and non-genital relationships with other religious, priests, and non-religious. Sometimes these are some of the most fruitful and growth-producing relationships we have known. I am able to say that some of my best friendships have been with religious Brothers or priests, and some of the deepest sharing has occurred in those relationships. When two people share intellectual and spiritual gifts and interests, as well as values, ministerial or pastoral interests, concerns, and so forth, the relationship can be quite profound and actually lead each other to God in privileged ways. It seems to me that John Paul II and Anna Teresa might well have had just such a relationship.
Yes, there is risk in such relationships; vows might be transgressed, vocations to love truly might be betrayed. But this is not necessarily so because again, the renewed commitment to chastity in celibacy that occurs choice-by-choice and decision-by-decision
can also model really profound and compelling instances of authentic friendship that lead the participants to God in a world that needs examples of deep and intimate friendship that not only can and do remain non-genital, but speak compellingly of the love of God. As is well known, friendship today is trivialized, and the sexual (not genital!!) nature of
every relationship is neglected or denied so that any deep relationship between man and woman (and often, similar relationships between those of the same sex) becomes suspect. (We also treat genital activity as being as imperative as breathing when that is simply not the case.) I would argue that this specific witness is an especially important reason religious men and women are called to make vows of chastity in celibacy in today's world, and one of the really critical reasons the Church has renewed the vocation of Consecrated Virgins living in the world.
Over time, as (hopefully) more of these letters are made available for reflection and analysis, it will be somewhat easier to say whether the relationship was ill-advised or another of those relationships mentioned above that will one day stand as a model of the relationship between authentic
Anamcara (alternate spellings,
Anam Chara or
Anam Cara). Currently, there have been several reassurances that JPII did not transgress his commitment to celibacy, the primacy of his relationship with God, or his responsibility to the Church, and there are quotes from Anna-Teresa that seem to indicate the same, despite a real personal struggle with the emotional dimensions of the relationship. I have read no comments on the nature of Tymieniecka's marriage over the years, and it seems to me that this is where the greatest risk actually existed. To truly understand the prudence or imprudence of the (continuing) relationship with JPII, it would be important to consider any information about how the JPII-ATT relationship affected Anna-Teresa's husband and their marriage. However, because the relationship with JPII was not hidden, and Anna-Teresa's marriage was sustained in any case, perhaps she was able to love her husband as fully as her vows called for. In that case, both he and she are remarkable people, as was Pope John Paul II.
For this reason as well, I cannot and so, will not, suggest adultery occurred. I cannot suggest, much less know, that lust was a problem for either party. (Physical attraction and intense emotionality need not become a matter of lust or adultery in one's heart, though of course they may do so. My hope is that the above picture of SS. Mother Teresa and Pope John Paul II demonstrate this in what seems to be a very natural and chaste expression of both masculine protectiveness and affection on JPII's part, and joyful receptivity and love on Mother Teresa's.) In any case, I will continue reading about the situation and post updates as there is reason to do so. Meanwhile, thanks again for your questions.
Posts
