3 Mystical Ways, what order?

  • Thread starter Thread starter DarinHamel
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Dear Darin,

I thought I should clarifly my last post, and why I spoke as I did. Your question was:
I have seen it go purgation, illumination and union and I have seen it go illumination, purgation and union. Which way do the more authoritative writers put it and why?
Click to expand...
You in Post #23:
I have read everything that is Catholic and mystically related including the scholars of scholars of the mystics and saints. If it is in English I have read it and found it too complicated or not applicable or just plain wanting.
Click to expand...
forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?p=894498

If you have difficulty accepting the solid teachings of saints in the vast number of books you read, how will you understand or accept the thoughts of simple lay folk who post here? :confused:

Carole
 
40.png
DarinHamel:
In my idea God calls us first by revealing His truth to the soul which is illumination, then that causes us such pain we repent and then cooperate and purge through the help of that recieved grace that is purgation until we are made ready for God to draw us into union.

Am I having a problem with semantics? I understand the Doctors of the Church say I am wrong but hey, questioning isn’t a sin.
Click to expand...
I do think terminology tends to trip us up around here. We can be “illumined” but not be in the illuminative way. We can experience the Prayer of Union (according to St. Teresa’s definition) but not be in the unitive way. Aargh!

I’ve always understood the purgative way to be the time when we begin cooperating with God’s grace and ardently strive to live a life of virtue. We are slowly purged of the attachments that keep us from a deeper experience of God. We are “illumined” in all sorts of ways during this time. A couple of examples come to mind: edification that comes from homilies, conversations with holy people, the example and inspiration of the saints and so on. Our method of prayer in this way tends to be “active” - for example vocal prayers and meditation.

I’ve always understood the illuminative way to be the way of contemplative prayer - when our active way of prayer slows down and God takes over. We simply rest in him. Illumination takes on another much deeper form here as God begins to teach us in the silence of our hearts. This illumination might come in the form of “light” (spiritual delights and consolations) or “darkness” (spiritual trials).

The unitive way, again to my understanding, is the perfection of the illuminative way - at least so far as is possible in this life. Here the person is “transformed” much as St. Paul says in my poor paraphrase “Not I who lives, but Christ in me” and “Put on the new man.” I also like St. Teresa’s analogy of Martha (the active) and Mary (the contemplative) working in perfect harmony. Surely, even here, illumination in both the forms mentioned in the purgative and illuminative ways continues to happen for these souls.

This is not to say the person in the unitive way is always in a state of contemplative absorbtion - far from it. Rather, God’s action through contemplation creates and ever increasing and habitual union of wills. The key to understanding this, again IMHO, is intentionality - when our every thought, word, deed and action is directed toward the glory of God. This is the mind set of the Saints.

So much for my rambling . . .

Dave.
 
Well said, Dave - as always! A nice sumnation in nutshell form. :clapping:

Carole
 
JOYSONG Wrote:
*If you have difficulty accepting the solid teachings of saints in the vast number of books you read, how will you understand or accept the thoughts of simple lay folk who post here? *

Because I cant ask a saint to clarify or argue with them. I can with the people here. Joysong, one day I will agree with St John’s version and the next I wont. I need to figure things out on my own or it doesn’t stick.

Joysong attack my ideas please, thats why they are here, dont attack me. I must admit nearly everytime I post a question on this site it devolves into personal attacks on me and once people saying I was an athiest here to cause trouble.

JOYSONG Wrote:
Darin, you have posted frequently on the forum a lot of things that would fall under the category of “private revelations,” obtained in your mystical prayer life. It is not a sin to share them, but it is not wise to ascribe them to the bible. Better, probably, to just say that it is simply your own opinion

I am glad you remember my other questions on other threads. What you might be figuring out is that I don’t take what the saints write as Gospel. I do take the Gospels as Gospel and I take the Catechism as fact. Everything else is fair game.

JOYSONG Wrote:
The same goes for the last idea you presented - a private mystical concept. *
*
Darins Quote:
The process of transubstantiation also outlines the mystical life as a four-part transformation of a person through Purgation, Illumination, Dark-Night and Union.

Dividing up the mystical life into a four part process is not my personal revelation. I figured it out outside of an altered state. I wrestled with it and tried to find other examples in the gospels. It is also not set in stone and I have temporarily set it aside for the sole reason of being more acceptable to the “traditional Catholic establishment”. But I wanted imput and argument against it rooted in the gospels or tradition.

JOYSONG, you are brilliant and compassionate. My personality profile says I am a natural leader and an innovator. I dislike the current mystical model that has been in vogue for 400 years and maybe we can stretch it back to Augustine but I feel obliged to change what I dont like.

This is an apologetics website and if my crazy ideas lead others astray then you better kick the protestants off this site too. And the athiests, pagans and then we can stop all debate and apologetics. :confused:

.
 
40.png
DarinHamel:
I dislike the current mystical model that has been in vogue for 400 years and maybe we can stretch it back to Augustine but I feel obliged to change what I dont like
Click to expand...
So what’s not to like?
Dave.
 
Dear Darin,
I dislike the current mystical model that has been in vogue for 400 years and maybe we can stretch it back to Augustine but I feel obliged to change what I dont like.
Click to expand...
Do you recognize that this is the problem? Your insight flows from private revelations; yet the Church does not advocate acceptance of them - not at all, as you know from your studies.

Sharing them publicly on a Catholic Forum seems to be your mission, as you stated above - to change what you don’t like. Problem being, though, if there is anything that should be changed beyond what the saints and Doctors of the Church have written, it should be done through the hierarchy, if you believe these writings are in error. I doubt you will be successful, though, for in proclaiming these saints a Doctor, the Church holds up their writings as bona-fide, worthy of belief and acceptance, and in accord with Catholic teachings.

I fail to see anywhere that I attacked you personally, but I did point out that your mysticism should be stated as “personal opinion.”
You may debate it as an apologist, certainly, but I pray that you tred carefully, Darin, for many souls’ eternal lives are in jeopardy if you lead them into error.
Dividing up the mystical life into a four part process is not my personal revelation. I figured it out outside of an altered state. I wrestled with it and tried to find other examples in the gospels.
Click to expand...
Yes, I see that “you” figured it out and presented your discovery under the holy teaching of transubstantiation. Do you not see that this is personal revelation and should be shared and stated as such?

That was the only basis of my post - certainly not to attack you, and I’m sorry you gleaned that from my message.

Carole
 
JOYSONG Wrote:
Sharing them publicly on a Catholic Forum seems to be your mission, as you stated above - to change what you don’t like. Problem being, though, if there is anything that should be changed beyond what the saints and Doctors of the Church have written, it should be done through the hierarchy, if you believe these writings are in error. I doubt you will be successful, though, for in proclaiming these saints a Doctor, the Church holds up their writings as bona-fide, worthy of belief and acceptance, and in accord with Catholic teachings.

I agree, thats why I am going through the process here in the Diocese of Detroit with the Moderator of the Curio named Msgr. Zenz and his Censor Professor Fastiggi at Sacred Heart Seminary.

My four part mystical process idea was approved by them and said not to be contrary to the Catholic Faith in a letter and in person. But it was also stated it wouldn’t recieve widespread acceptance since it is outside the traditional language of the Church and I also misused theological terms and was corrected on those.

I was asked to re-write my entire thesis in traditional “Catholic” language but was not required too by them. But as an obedient son of the Church I will re-write it and then choose the better of the two with the counsel of my spiritual director, the Censor and the Curio. So I ask once again, prove me wrong with scripture or Catechism, but stop warning me that I am going to lead others astray.

JOYSONG Wrote:
a Doctor, the Church holds up their writings as bona-fide, worthy of belief and acceptance, and in accord with Catholic teachings.

I am NOT some naive fundamentalist who believes everything a saint says. The Doctors are worthy of belief and acceptance but I also know that the church says I dont have to believe them or their theories either. They are not the fundamentals of our faith.

I have met many who left the Church because they had a profound spiritual awakening and when they couldn’t find or understand the answers the Church offered they left and joined a group that did offer answers however crazy they are.

The Roman Catholic Church has a major problem explaining the Mystical Way. This is a fact that is proven by all the ex-Catholics at yoga ashrams, ufo cult headquarters and and every other crack pot group that can explain things, even if they are wrong.

There is an exodus out of the Church when the Church does have the answers but they are not accessible to the average intellect. Nobody wants to read a two thousand page thesis by a college professor about every concievable spiritual problem except the one they are experiencing.

If there was no problem there would be no alternatives. That is a truism and the New Age is the alternative to us. We need to make sense and do it in a simple way and to it in a relevant way. Thats what I am trying to do by posting here.

So come on and help me. If you dont like my four part theory prove me wrong with scripture or Catechism. I am posting to get help and to focus my mind, not to stroke my ego.
 
Dear Darin,
So come on and help me. If you don’t like my four part theory prove me wrong with scripture or Catechism.
Click to expand...
You have a way of putting words in my mouth. I did not dislike your theory, only that you did not state it was *your theory. *And I’m not here as an apologist ready for a debate.

Honestly, Darin, it doesn’t really matter to me what the order is, and which comes first. Loving hearts desirous of following Christ do not need to know a pattern; i.e., that they need to do B before A. All that matters is that they love Him and pour out their ointment at His feet in pure sorrow for their past sins. He does the rest, provided they are faithful, no?

The problem with our saints’ writings is that some were under obedience to describe their spiritual progress using some type of viable order that often requires the use of a pattern to describe the customary journey. We could argue semantics forever as to which saint wrote more descriptively and said it better, but it is futile - for the gospel message is “repent and believe the good news!”

It does little good, IMO, to use the doctrine of transubstantiation to defend one’s interpretation of the journey as being step A, B, C, and D, rather than B, A, C, D, or any other probable sequence. The same goes for your interpretation of the scriptural 40-day intervals to which you applied your own understanding of the sequence. This promotes your personal opinion as a mystical teaching, and can cause problems, if you stop and consider it more thoroughly. I stand by that, and reiterate that I am not trying to undermine you personally, though I seem to have trouble convincing you.

🙂 Carole
 
40.png
JimG:
I think the most recent order is given this way:

–detachment from the internet
–purgation
–illumination
–union (contemplation)

I’m still working on the first one.
Click to expand...
does this mean giving up the forums is a necessary step in our spiritual perfection? boy are we in trouble.

a good concise guide for the relative beginner on this topic is Spiritual Passages by Fr. Benedict Groeschel, and has the value of preparing someone who is just getting serious in progressing in the spiritual life to understand what happens in prayer, why it happens, and what is the goal of this prayer.
 
Dear Darin,

Just a couple more thoughts in response to your last post.
I am NOT some naive fundamentalist who believes everything a saint says. The Doctors are worthy of belief and acceptance but I also know that the church says I don’t have to believe them or their theories either. They are not the fundamentals of our faith.
Click to expand...
Agreed about the fundamentals. However, have you noticed that these Doctors have not contradicted one another in their writings, as though we need to set it straight in our day and age with a new explanation that they somehow overlooked?
I have met many who left the Church because they had a profound spiritual awakening and when they couldn’t find or understand the answers the Church offered they left and joined a group that did offer answers however crazy they are.

The Roman Catholic Church has a major problem explaining the Mystical Way. This is a fact that is proven by all the ex-Catholics at yoga ashrams, ufo cult headquarters and and every other crack pot group that can explain things, even if they are wrong.
Click to expand...
:ehh: If they were true Catholics, receiving true mystical gifts, they would not have left the Church. These are the dangers that the writings of the saints tried to prevent. It suggests to me that in these cases, the persons preferred their own mysticism rather than cooperate with God through the guidance of the ministerium.

One very powerful statement that St. Teresa of Avila made on her deathbed to which we should pay critical attention, is, “I AM A DAUGHTER OF THE CHURCH!” And she repeated it, I believe, three times.

You no doubt read in her book, as well, that when her spiritual director contradicted a directive that Our Lord gave her in prayer, she asked Him what should she do? He replied, “You do well, daughter, to obey — but I, Myself, will hold him accountable.”

There is never, therefore, an excuse to follow one’s own will in favor of a personal revelation, in direct opposition to those whom God places in His stead in the Church. He upholds their guidance, even when it’s not the best choice.

Carole
 
JOYSONG Wrote:
It does little good, IMO, to use the doctrine of transubstantiation to defend one’s interpretation of the journey as being step A, B, C, and D, rather than B, A, C, D, or any other probable sequence. The same goes for your interpretation of the scriptural 40-day intervals to which you applied your own understanding of the sequence. This promotes your personal opinion as a mystical teaching, and can cause problems, if you stop and consider it more thoroughly. I stand by that, and reiterate that I am not trying to undermine you personally, though I seem to have trouble convincing you.
AND
You have a way of putting words in my mouth. I did not dislike your theory, only that you did not state it was your theory. And I’m not here as an apologist ready for a debate.

It is my personal theory and it does work to compare it to both the Eucharistic Prayer (not Transubstantiation) and to the life of Christ. By looking at the life and words of Chirst you can learn things on many levels including mystical theory. It is not a new concept that there are inner meanings to the words and actions of Christ.

I have also take the Heroes Journey from Joseph Campbell and re-worked it to be in line with Catholic christian thought. That would no doubt give you a heart attack.

If you don’t want to debate this then quit posting about it. I respect you and you have given me excellent advice and ideas in other threads. But this time your not.

Wait! Maybe I am unwanted here? Is there some other Catholic website that I can post my questions?

How about this?
Three levels-Purgation, Illumination and Unification.
Three aspects in people-Feeling, Intellect and Will.

Do we work on one at a time at each stage like first feelings at purgation then intellect at the illuminative stage and then the will at unification? or a third of each at each stage?

I figure that it is done is progression. First Feelings then Intellect and then the Will. Of course all are connected and you cant work on one without improving all, but I think the majority of work is on one at a time.

Any thoughts?
 
Dear Darin,

:crying: You are not hearing me, I’m afraid. As you said, time for me to leave.
 
Dear friend

Whatever your theory is and however commendable or flawed it may be I am not able to say, but you should take notice of the advice Carole is giving to you.

To state what I think would be only to re-iterate what Carole has already said so very well already, so I will say I agree with her and that as she has said it is not the first time you have made public very private experiences.

The first thing to do is to always keep these things between you, God and your Priest/Spiritual Director/trusted wise friend, before you ever, and I mean ever, make such things a matter for public reading.

Religious zeal and fervour must never come before prudence and humility, infact a healthy indifference should be practised in such things as are being addressed in this thread.

God Bless you and much love and peace to you

Teresa
 
40.png
springbreeze:
Dear friend

Whatever your theory is and however commendable or flawed it may be I am not able to say, but you should take notice of the advice Carole is giving to you.

To state what I think would be only to re-iterate what Carole has already said so very well already, so I will say I agree with her and that as she has said it is not the first time you have made public very private experiences.

The first thing to do is to always keep these things between you, God and your Priest/Spiritual Director/trusted wise friend, before you ever, and I mean ever, make such things a matter for public reading.

God Bless you and much love and peace to you

Teresa
Click to expand...
How many times do I have to say this? I did put this before my Spiritual Advisor, then the Detroit Censor and then the Curio of the Archdiocese of Detroit. I have it in writing that I am allowed to talk about my private spiritual experiences and that this theory isn’t against the Catholic Faith! :mad:

**I am asking for ideas, debate, questions, criticisms but if all you going to do is say things like ** Religious zeal and fervour must never come before prudence and humility, infact a healthy indifference should be practised in such things as are being addressed in this thread. **Don’t post! **

I want help with my theories, but I already have a spiritual advisor. So does anybody have any opinions on MY QUESTIONS or is this another thread where I get accused of causing trouble and it devolves into attacking me and then the moderator shuts it down?
 
Dear friend

I wish you well with your endeavours. I am sorry to have been of no help to you.

Why are you so angry? If it is God’s work it will come to fruition without you becoming angry over it.

God Bless you always and much love and peace to you

Teresa
 
Would divine intervention bring illumination first? Could the order be determined by how and type of Grace received? Is there only one order? Thank You, Tim
 
40.png
TOP:
Would divine intervention bring illumination first? Could the order be determined by how and type of Grace received? Is there only one order? Thank You, Tim
Click to expand...
Yes, I think the order can change. But Illumination can only occur to a degree before purgation. That is how I view it though.
 
40.png
springbreeze:
Dear friend

I wish you well with your endeavours. I am sorry to have been of no help to you.

Why are you so angry? If it is God’s work it will come to fruition without you becoming angry over it.

God Bless you always and much love and peace to you

Teresa
Click to expand...
If its Gods work then in my experience then I will have to suffer and agonize and fight tooth and nail for every bit of ground God wants me to gain for Him! Anger helps sometimes.
 
I think its where you start to count. Some would say that God implants a desire for Him first and then we conform and comply and purge until we are ready for the grace of illumination. Thats the regular interpretation.

So they would count from the first desire. In my opinion God has placed that desire in every baptized person so to count from there when describing the mystical life seems strange. Why not describe the entire evolution of consciousness from the normal psychology of childhood through adulthood and then the mystical ways?

St John says there is the active purgation of the senses and the passive purgation of the soul and that there is illumination and union.

Technically it should go active purgation of the senses then illumination, after that is the passive purgation of the soul and then union. Thats “4” stages instead of the normally “3” of purgation, illumination, union.

Most writers include the passive purgation (Dark Night of the soul) in the stage of union. If you dont include the active purgation in the illuminative stage then why do they do it at the union stage?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top