I love Edith Stein, but as a parent of a child with autism, I am naturally skeptical of any conclusions that might be drawn from studying historical texts in connection with autism as it is classified today. Even now, there is often inadequate language to accurately describe the social and developmental challenges of autism to those who …
I love Edith Stein, but as a parent of a child with autism, I am naturally skeptical of any conclusions that might be drawn from studying historical texts in connection with autism as it is classified today. Even now, there is often inadequate language to accurately describe the social and developmental challenges of autism to those who don’t encounter it every day-e.g., it is very easy to conflate the diagnostic language with just being shy or quiet or sensitive. The poverty of such language was even greater back in Stein’s time, so very susceptible to modern projections. Descriptions of St. Therese of Lisieux as a child are even more colorful, but thankfully I haven’t seen anyone pathologize her beyond attributing her with a spirited personality. If only we could meet the saints in person in this world!
I am a parent of a child with autism (actually two children with autism but one of them can "pass") and I work in a field that is a haven for very high-functioning slightly odd people who in the past would have gone into math (or I suppose music) or, before that, possibly philosophy. I would categorize myself as a very high functioning slightly odd person (I have deficits but they are not insuperable). In the case of most saints, I read their works and see "they are definitely holier than me" but in the case of St Teresa Benedicta of the Cross I read (anything that she was not writing for a general audience / nuns) and see "she is definitely holier than me *and smarter than me"". There are people who are smarter than me who are not also slightly odd (like, I have also read St JP2's thesis on St John of the Cross, or rather the book that was published from it, and he is smarter than me also and I doubt anyone has ever proposed that he was not neurotypical, whatever that word means to anyone today), so that by itself doesn't really indicate anything. What I more commonly try to assess from writings is "was this person a mystic (in the sense that I mean the word)" because sometimes you can smell it on someone's breath like salami (e.g. St Thomas Aquinas writing about love somewhere in the Summa) and because this is just a more interesting (though equally unimportant because not necessary for salvation) question.
I love Edith Stein, but as a parent of a child with autism, I am naturally skeptical of any conclusions that might be drawn from studying historical texts in connection with autism as it is classified today. Even now, there is often inadequate language to accurately describe the social and developmental challenges of autism to those who don’t encounter it every day-e.g., it is very easy to conflate the diagnostic language with just being shy or quiet or sensitive. The poverty of such language was even greater back in Stein’s time, so very susceptible to modern projections. Descriptions of St. Therese of Lisieux as a child are even more colorful, but thankfully I haven’t seen anyone pathologize her beyond attributing her with a spirited personality. If only we could meet the saints in person in this world!
I am a parent of a child with autism (actually two children with autism but one of them can "pass") and I work in a field that is a haven for very high-functioning slightly odd people who in the past would have gone into math (or I suppose music) or, before that, possibly philosophy. I would categorize myself as a very high functioning slightly odd person (I have deficits but they are not insuperable). In the case of most saints, I read their works and see "they are definitely holier than me" but in the case of St Teresa Benedicta of the Cross I read (anything that she was not writing for a general audience / nuns) and see "she is definitely holier than me *and smarter than me"". There are people who are smarter than me who are not also slightly odd (like, I have also read St JP2's thesis on St John of the Cross, or rather the book that was published from it, and he is smarter than me also and I doubt anyone has ever proposed that he was not neurotypical, whatever that word means to anyone today), so that by itself doesn't really indicate anything. What I more commonly try to assess from writings is "was this person a mystic (in the sense that I mean the word)" because sometimes you can smell it on someone's breath like salami (e.g. St Thomas Aquinas writing about love somewhere in the Summa) and because this is just a more interesting (though equally unimportant because not necessary for salvation) question.