Brown, Judith. Immodest Acts: The Life of a Lesbian Nun in Renaissance Italy.

Brown, Judith C. ''Immodest Acts: The Life of a Lesbian Nun in Renaissance Italy''. Oxford:             Oxford ''University Press, 1986.

Judith Brown’s thoughtful and well-researched work into the life of Sister Benedetta Carlini, abbess of the Theatine nuns of Pescia, Italy, provides the reader with a revealing look into the ways in which female sexuality was understood in Renaissance society. By modern definitions Sister Benedetta was a lesbian, but that term would have little to no meaning to contemporaries of Sister Benedetta. She was the subject of two investigations by the provost of Pescia, Stefano Cecchi, and his inquiries into her personal and religious life resulted in her imprisonment within the Theatine convent until her death. Sister Benedetta’s life and the records of the investigations into her conduct provide modern scholars with the opportunity to explore the sexual and religious politics of Renaissance Italy, and Brown does so with gusto.

The obligatory re-telling of Benedetta’s childhood and early life in the convent paints a picture of a very vulnerable and gullible young girl. Brown never condescends Benedetta’s religious experiences and she carefully deconstructs the more fantastical visions Benedetta is said to have received, offering examples of how popular beliefs of Renaissance Italy would have influenced Benedetta’s childhood religious beliefs. Benedetta arrives at the Theatine convent in 1599 and her immersion into convent life gives Brown the opportunity to shed light on the inner machinations of convents. The growing Catholic Reformation spurred on many young girls to join convents, but often times this required “careful social and financial planning” (32). The other nuns initially dismissed Benedetta’s visions, although they were not wholly unsympathetic to the violent nature of her visions, assigning a younger novice, Bartolomea Crivelli, to watch her at night (55). Benedetta’s mystical experiences reached its peak when the signs of the stigmata appeared on her hands and head, at which point she was fully embraced by her sisters and elected abbess sometime in early 1619 (59).

The increasingly romantic nature of her visions with Jesus culminated in her public “marriage” to Jesus (70). Benedetta enjoyed the publicity and the Theatine convent undoubtedly benefited from the notoriety Benedetta’s visions and prophecies brought. Competition for money and benefactors was fierce, and Benedetta’s visions would have set the Theatines apart. However it was this same publicity that would attract the attention of church officials and provost Stefano Cecchi. The investigation into Benedetta exposed the falsity of her visions and uncovered the sexual and romantic relationship she had been carrying on with the novice Bartolomea. Disgraced and stripped of her power within the convent, Benedetta died in 1661 after 35 years imprisonment (132).

On the surface it would be appear the Benedetta’s sexual practices were the main concern of the investigating committee. Monks and nuns indulging in sexual relationships with the opposite sex were not uncommon. Brown notes of several instances where monks blatantly visited convents for intimate encounters with nuns. Homosexuality between men was strictly forbidden, both by society and the clergy, and gallons of ink had been spilled over the moral implications of male same-sex relationships. Yet women in same-sex relationships were a completely alien concept. Their activities were thought to be so reprehensible that women punished for their homosexual activity were convicted of “unspeakable” crimes; the fear being that even mentioning the idea of lesbianism would lead to corruption. Brown notes that the common belief in Renaissance society was that lesbians were simply women who really did want men but were confused or women who wanted to be men (11). Therefore, Benedetta’s sexuality would have been almost impossible for the investigation committee to fully grasp.

In the records both Benedetta and Bartolomea explain that Benedetta took on the male identity of one of the angels that visited her, Splenditello, when the two were intimate with each other (127), so Benedetta’s behavior fit into one of several Renaissance explanations for lesbianism. Homosexuals were frequently condemned to death when discovered, and it is unusual that Benedetta escaped this fate when there was no doubt as to her sexual behavior. Although Benedetta was in a same-sex relationship Brown argues that this was not the main issue for the investigation committee. Rather, Benedetta’s mystic visions and her lack of “personal virtue” (106) formed the basis for the committee’s inquiry into her behavior. Her homosexuality was part of a larger “problem” of falsely claiming to be a mystic (135). Mystics were expected to follow certain guidelines and social mores (97), behavior that Benedetta eschewed in an effort to maintain her own path to God and salvation.

Brown treats her subject with the sensitivity that Benedetta deserves yet at times she is reluctant to acknowledge the more problematic aspects of Benedetta’s actions. Specifically the first sexual encounter between Benedetta and Bartolomea reads as nothing less than rape. Bartolomea recounts how Benedetta, in a fit of passion, holds her down and forcibly touches her and rubs against her. Even if Benedetta and Bartolomea’s relationship developed into a genuine expression of love and affection, it started as a forced encounter between a powerful and influential nun and a young novice. Brown glosses over this sexual incident and does not spend any time considering the implications of it or what it reveals about Benedetta’s character. This issue aside, Brown provides a compelling narrative of a woman torn down by the very institution she devoted her life to, as well as a keen insight into the bureaucracy of the church responsible for Benedetta’s downfall.