In the beginning of her account, Mother Maria Theresia expressed the wish to have her sketch included in a biography of Mother Francis. In fact, Reverend Ignatius Jeiler used this valuable contribution scrupulously in his biography of the Aix-la-Chapelle foundress. One senses Mother Maria Theresia’s great gratitude in every sentence. Even later after her own congregation had grown strong and she felt secure, she ever maintained the role of learner.
After the death of Mother Francis, she requested a photograph of her and a small personal remembrance. When in 1867, her Sisters adopted a definite religious habit, the style chosen closely resembled that worn by the Sisters of Mother Francis. The Sisters wore this garb practically unaltered until 1960. It cannot be established definitely whether the similarity of religious habit was chosen intentionally or not. But certainly it points to the close spiritual relationship between the two congregations.
After her period of apprenticeship, as one may readily call the time she spent in Aix-la-Chapelle, the returning superior was confronted by three weighty questions in addition to her daily cares; the redrafting of the Constitution, a legal foundation for the orphanage, and an economic basis for the congregation in respect to the inheritance of Mother Theresia herself. Of course, these problems did not arise at the moment, but for some time had been awaiting cooperative decisions. Since all three questions were of greatest importance for the efficient development of the small congregation, the Sisters were greatly interested in all of them. It is to be noted that in the question of their own inheritance, which touched the Sisters so closely, they manifested the greatest reservation.
Economic Security of the Congregation Through the Inheritance of Mother Maria Theresia
What was the situation relative to the inheritance of the Widow Bonzel to her eldest daughter? In an order without any exterior apostolate, such as the contemplative order of the Poor Clares, the question of an economic basis is not so important although here also it plays a role. But in an active order serving in an educative or in a nursing capacity, a secure economic basis is wise and all-important. Only under such conditions can the congregation follow its apostolate of charity. Under other situations love soon becomes exhausted by the many demands for consolation and encouragement placed upon it. Consequently, there can be no valid objection to the influence the Bonzel family exercised in the decision of 1859, to make the original establishment in Olpe, and again in 1863 to have at least a foundation in Olpe. Considerations for establishing the motherhouse in Elspe were discussed earlier. These were abandoned lest the foundation would not have the economic backing of the Bonzel family and consequently lack a sound economic basis.
The first transfer of abode for the young congregation was from the so-called Schuerholz House. For this, the Sisters were grateful to Mrs. Bonzel. After Easter in 1860, Mrs. Bonzel purchased the Zimmermann House as a dowry, to be divided equally between her two daughters Aline and Emilie. An uncle of Sister Maria Theresia bequeathed an inheritance of real estate and between four and five thousand Reich dollars to his niece. Mrs. Bonzel also purchased the so-called Weber House for a motherhouse in Olpe. To have the diocese of Paderborn purchase the property was under deliberation for a long time. The experience in Italy, however, was fresh in their memories, in which the political unification of Italy with one stroke confiscated all convent and church property. Dean Goerdes in his letter to the bishop dated April 16, 1861, had counseled the bishop not to make it too easy for “rapacious hands” to obtain possession of convent property, if in Germany as now in Italy, the hour of visitation should strike. Did he have a premonition of the Kulturkampf? At all events his counsel was followed by Mrs. Bonzel, for the purchase of real estate and a house was transacted in her name.
The question concerning the inheritance of Sister Maria Theresia Bonzel, especially a suitable gift to the Episcopal See in Paderborn, busily engaged Reverend Schmidt. A long and extended correspondence resulted between him and the General Vicariate. Mrs. Bonzel rightly exercised justice to her second daughter Emilie also.
The fact that Reverend Schmidt assumed the difficulties of negotiating these personal matters manifests his great zeal as spiritual director of the Olpe congregation. He spared no hardship to bring this affair to a successful conclusion. Seemingly, Sister Maria Theresia personally did not enter into any of the deliberations. In the negotiations, there is no trace of her attitude toward the question. That she understood the problem is certain. In all these negotiations no one questioned her in regard to the facts because she remained silent throughout. At that time she was a subject; the reins of authority were in other hands. She took the expression “Poor Franciscan” very seriously. For this reason, Director Schmidt had a poor assistant in her. After the prospective donation to the Episcopal See had been considered and justly approved, difficulties arose between the sisters of Salzkotten and those of Olpe.
Thus Reverend Schmidt was obliged on June 20, 1862, to report the following to the General Vicariate:
Because of a higher mandate, I contacted Mrs. Bonzel in Olpe yesterday concerning the settlement of the donation to the episcopal See. She mentioned that a settlement would be impossible until the confused situation of the Franciscan congregation becomes stabilized and the convent becomes secure. She declared her willingness to place the entire inheritance at the disposition of the bishopric. But since the property is the dowry of her daughter, Sister Maria Theresia, she cannot contract that until there is certainty that the future of her daughter is secure. She begged that the settlement be postponed for the present until the investigation relative to the Franciscan superior be concluded — since her reasons are fundamental, I am not in a position to oppose her views and her explanation.
Only on November 16, 1863, was Revered Schmidt able to inform the bishop that he had again contacted Mrs. Bonzel concerning the donation. On October 4, 1864, the negotiations were finally and definitely closed. By signature Mrs. Bonzel ratified the transaction through which the property of the Olpe orphanage, secured through the dowry of her daughter Aline, now Sister Maria Theresia, was transferred to the Episcopal See in Paderborn. The pastor of St. Martin Church in Olpe, Reverend Hengstebeck, accepted the property in the name of the Episcopal See in recognition of the terms stated in the contract. In substance these terms were: the Episcopal See accepted the gift donation for the foundation of an institution in Olpe for the care of neglected and poor orphaned children. This institution was assigned to the management of the Poor Franciscans. If said congregation should cease to exist, the orphanage was to be reassigned to another Catholic congregation. This gift contract was also licensed by civil authority on March 1, 1865.
One may ask why such a complex negotiation was pursued. The reason is found in the first statute of the congregation in Chapter II, Article 3, which states: “Poverty without property. As daughters of St. Francis the congregation possesses no property and utilizes a house with garden and real estate loaned by the bishop.” These statutes were not approved by the bishop until July 6, 1865. But the provisions for a life of poverty without property had to be set up beforehand. Sister Maria Theresia understood St. Francis of Assisi’s concept of poverty very well. She endeavored to introduce this same idea of poverty into her own congregation, the essence of which is based on the abrogation of all possessions and claims to possession. In Franciscan orders, the Pope possesses the right of all property servicing the order. In the young congregation in Olpe, the Episcopal See in Paderborn possesses the right and exercises proprietorship when the congregation has to testify. Ten years after the so-called Kulturkampf, this very contract was the cause of much sorrow and grief and even occasioned a lawsuit. More on this point later.
The avowal of Franciscan poverty was the only reason in the foregoing of the gift contract. Although Sister Maria Theresia apparently did not enter into the difficult and laborious negotiations, these, however, were necessary because she wished poverty without property. However, this was not the only way that the title “Poor Franciscan”