Christianity is NOT a Mystical Religion

  • Thread starter Thread starter ragus93
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
No I don’t.

I do see it in the contemplative prayer center where I attend though. It’s been going now for 15 years and I have been able to watch more than a few people traverse the levels of spirituality both mystic and non mystic alike.

The mystics can feel and experience more of what God is doing in them. They often know what God is doing in them from day to day. I don’t mean to exaggerate this as God is beyond us profoundly, but still there is MUCH more of an understanding for the mystics.

Occasionally a mystic will have a vision that is completely wrong also and other sensory experiences that are not accurate so it’s not as if this insight they have is totally accurate.

The non mystics almost never know what God is doing in them from day to day. Being around mystics they are likely to think those types are ahead or more spiritual. These types just have to wait around long enough to be made into different people over time and they rarely know what it is God is doing in them until it manifests itself fully enough to be noticed.

I have noticed both groups can be used to do miracles but the mystics are more likely to naturally grow into that as their felt and sensed connection with God’s power makes them more likely to believe in miracles. However the non mystical types can just open themselves to believing in it and having them happen.

Going through the night of sense for the mystic is dryer and darker and much more sensed and experienced, and the very non mystical types seem much less aware of the night as they pass through it.

This is all just subjective observations I have been able to witness in the community I am part of.

Also it is NOT actually two distinct groups-- it is a spectrum from the most mystical types to the least and every variant in between. The least mystical still have felt and sensed experiences with God sometimes and the full blown mystics still have periods of dryness and such.
 
@franklinstower Okay, so I guess from what you’re saying both the mystics and the non-mystics engage in contemplative prayer and practice, it’s just that they experience it differently. So someone on the mystic end of the spectrum would be much more aware of the work of the Holy Spirit in making them a new creation, whereas someone on the non-mystic end would engage in the same contemplative practice, with the same devotion, but would not “feel” the work of the Holy Spirit directly (so they would need to have faith that the Holy Spirit is actually working within them)? Would that be a correct understanding, or am I misreading you?
 
Last edited:
I think that is about right. The mystic will feel it more and have more intense experiences than the non mystic end but in reality people fall somewhere along the spectrum between the two extremes.

Both groups require faith as it is the only sure way to God anyway but the mystic end of the spectrum sees more sign posts along the way, some of which are wrong, and so discernment is needed.
 
Okay, yes I think I definitely agree with this. I was under the impression, probably because English is a second language for me, that you were initially saying that there is a group of people who are not benefited by contemplative forms of prayer (the non-mystics) and then a group who are (the mystics). But I now understand that actually your distinction revolves around how the two experience contemplative prayer and progression differently.
franklinstower said:
Both groups require faith as it is the only sure way to God
Click to expand...
I agree, but the crux of this matter is what this faith consists in.

I’ve recently been reading the entry for “Faith” in the Catholic Encyclopedia (here) to get the Catholic perspective.

That entry really articulates and fully explains this definition for faith, provided by St. Thomas Aquinas:
Catholic
the act of the intellect assenting to a Divine truth owing to the movement of the will, which is itself moved by the grace of God
Click to expand...
Compare this with the Protestant version (taken from C.S. Lewis, Mere Christianity):
Protestant
Faith, in the sense in which I am here using the word, is the art of holding on to things your reason has once accepted, in spite of your changing moods
Click to expand...
And finally compare with the Eastern Orthodox understanding provided by Vladimir Lossky, here:
Eastern Orthodox
Certainly, faith is present in all walks, in all sciences of the human spirit, but as supposition, as working hypothesis: here, the moment of faith remains burdened with an uncertainty which proof alone could clear. Christian faith, on the contrary, is adherence to a presence which confers certitude, in such a way that certitude, here, is first. “Faith is the substance of things hoped for, the manifestation of realities unseen” (Heb. 11:1). What one quests is already present, precedes us, makes possible our questing itself. “Through faith, we comprehend (we think) how the ages have been produced” (Heb. 11:3). Thus faith allows us to think, it gives us true intelligence. Knowledge is given to us by faith, that is to say, by our participatory adherence to the presence of Him Who reveals Himself. Faith is therefore not a psychological attitude, a mere fidelity. It is an ontological relationship between man and God, an internally objective relationship for which the catechumen prepares himself, and through which baptism and chrismation are conferred upon the faithful: gifts which restore and vivify the deepest nature of man.
Click to expand...
 
Personally, the definition I identify with least, in my experience, is the Protestant one. It seems to me that the definition given by Lewis requires God to be understandable and to fit our categories of understanding. That is why according to him faith is holding to (via your will) what your intellect has once accepted. The trouble here is that the intellect by itself cannot “accept” a Divine Truth since it never is clearly perceptible.

I quite enjoyed the Catholic entry on Faith too, I found it very insightful, and very thorough. St. Aquinas is definitely an improvement over Lewis. Firstly, Aquinas relates Faith to the acceptance of a Divine Truth. Faith is not belief in any kind of truth, but specifically Divine Truth since Divine Truth cannot be attained except by revelation, and therefore requires trust (faith) in the Revealer (in this case God). And this makes absolute sense of why faith is essential on our journeys - without this trust in God’s Self-Revelation, we cannot attain to Union - so faith really is the manifestation of things unseen.

Furthermore, Aquinas’s definition makes it clear, contra Lewis, that when we have faith, our intellect assents to the revealed Divine Truth, but it does so not because it comprehends it fully, but rather in virtue of the Source Who has revealed it - God. God by definition cannot lie, so Faith is absolutely certain and indubitable.

Nevertheless, Aquinas underlies that faith is not a matter merely of the intellect. Since even if, through the Divine light of faith one sees the Truth, one can reject it (as the demons do), in which case they do not have faith. So ultimately faith requires grace and charity to direct one towards God, the supreme good. So really it is ultimately the divine desire and love for God that causes the will to cause the intellect to assent and hold onto Divine Truth.

The other very interesting bit of the entry was the following. Sure, God being Truthful, and whatever Divine Truth God reveals being true is beyond doubt. But how can we know that the statement “God Has spoken X Y Z” is true? And here the motives of credibility come in - namely miracles, prophecies, and such. But these only prove the trustworthiness of Him Who Reveals - not the truth of what is revealed. Hence where intellect and will come in, along with the Light of Faith and Divine Grace.

So I really loved this Catholic definition, it was very insightful for me and certainly clarified a lot for me.

The Eastern Orthodox definition is quite similar - it also points out that Christian (Divine) Faith is a certitude since it is the adherence to/desire for that Presence which grounds all truth. The difference between the two that I see is that in the Eastern Orthodox definition the relationship with the Divine is put at the forefront. Faith is about our adherence to a Presence - not merely a Divine Truth, which is here secondary. So I also very much love this definition, and I see it as building upon the Catholic one and making the personal aspect at the forefront.
 
Anyway - I hope I have not bored you with my studies on Faith 🙂 ! I found meditating on Faith to be very enjoyable and beneficial and thought I would share. If you feel like sharing some of your own reflections on this please don’t hesitate!
 
Last edited:
You have not bored me at all. We are a little different in that I put less emphasis in specific definitions about these things and more on the various ways that people experience and grow in faith and I can see room for all of the definitions that you gave examples of and many others that have yet to be written.

When I asked the monk what faith was he told me to go read a specific scripture which I cannot now remember but paraphrased it was talking about how Jesus is the author of true faith. This led me to believe that Jesus would have to infuse his faith into me and so I started allowing that.

I have a living faith that has grown in me and is still growing deeper over time, but it has not come by way of definitions-- it has come by way of being infused into me by Jesus. I want the faith that Jesus has and gives.

The best definition of faith I have ever heard is that it is an orientation of one’s life towards God. I think of faith as a deep and profound receptivity to God and God’s energies for healing and transformation and the ability to allow that to happen in a way that is not understood fully and that can take a great deal of time to manifest.
 
ragus93 said:
I’ve been making my way through the Mystical Theology of the Eastern Church, an absolutely fantastic read so far, so thank you once again for that.
Click to expand...
Glad you like it - I began reading it some 12 years ago on a January 1st, New Years Day, in my wooden breakfast nook, and a silence came over me as a small noetic voice came to me saying: “This is the Truth…” As I read along, I began to read slower, because I did not want to get to the end, but just keep on reading…
ragus93 said:
I’m beginning to realize that indeed different theologies open different possibilities in mysticism, so this opens me to the importance of theology, an importance that I never understood in this manner before.
Click to expand...
It is an understanding of the East, which seems utterly lost in the West, which holds that Theology is PRACTICAL, and not merely esoterically interesting… So when a Calvinist proclaims “Once saved always saved!”, we immediately see the practical result of the tenet, which is: “No need to try, to struggle for the Faith, for you have attained, and cannot lose your prize…” Hence for us, Theology is vital, and never speculative…
ragus93 said:
• How can we know, before we engage in mysticism by following a particular religion, whether the religion’s theology is the correct one?
Click to expand...
The “Mysticism” of the Orthodox Catholic Christian Faith is repentance and suffering - eg purification of the heart, denial of self, and the suffering attendant thereto… Everything beyond that is a Gift… Turn from the world and its pleasures, embrace its pains, and turn to God in love of God and neighbor in prayer and repentance and almsgiving, and one will be well on one’s way to a way of life that is eminently Christian…

geo
 
franklinstower said:
Transformation is messy and often painful. While it leads to a greater spirituality and deeper relationship with Christ the way to that is fraught with purification and disorders brought to the surface. No matter how long someone has been on a spiritual path, if they add serious prayer to it, and begin entering a contemplative state, they will have disorder arise again and often disorder they thought was healed.

That is a hard sell in my experience.
Click to expand...
I about laughed out loud reading this - I mean, it’s true!
We have an expression: “Give blood, take Spirit!”
Without personal transformation, you have nothing…
With it, you have pain and suffering…
And in that pain and suffering, you make progress…
There is danger in that progress…
Having a Spiritual Father is a good thing…
Ever try to find one??
Those guys don’t grow on trees…
(Except the tree of the Cross, mind you!)
So find a partner, a good priest even…
A few, perhaps, have done it without external discipling…
Christ discipled it as a discipled effort…
The Church disciples Her disciples…

I like your posts a lot…

Speaking first hand rocks!

geo
 
Great post man. The group I am a part of has only about 20 people. A new guy said it would be packed with thousands of it wasn’t so real!!

I do have a spiritual father by the way, a Trappist Monk. He is nearing the end of his life and I put in a post on this forum asking about very advanced spiritual directors to replace him when he passes.

Someone responded with a post about a monk priest who “can read souls” and sent me his name and information. It was my spiritual director!!
 
franklinstower said:
I put in a post on this forum asking about very advanced spiritual directors
Click to expand...
Here is one who reposed Dec 7, a month and a half ago… And the vision which called him to establish 17 monasteries in the US… Elder Ephraim…


Be careful, my brother… You will not be finding many “very advanced spiritual elders”, and the quest itself is filled with unavoidable vainglory… Content yourself with purification of the heart, and God will work through you as He sees fit… Going on pilgrimages to Monasteries is always a good thing… Not all really good elders are “spiritual” - Or at least they will not say so… I only know one Orthodox Priest who teaches Hesychastic Prayer… I can give you his name by pm if you wish - In New Mexico…

You do not need a monk who can read souls - You need repentance…
We all do…
To the end…

Here is another recently reposed Holy Elder…

Giving a little lecture on the Jesus Prayer…


geo
 
Last edited:
You said–

Be careful, my brother… You will not be finding many “very advanced spiritual elders” , and the quest itself is filled with unavoidable vainglory… Content yourself with purification of the heart, and God will work through you as He sees fit… Going on pilgrimages to Monasteries is always a good thing… Not all really good elders are “spiritual” - Or at least they will not say so… I only know one Orthodox Priest who teaches Hesychastic Prayer… I can give you his name by pm if you wish - In New Mexico…

You do not need a monk who can read souls - You need repentance…
We all do…
To the end…

I am a little uncomfortable with these paragraphs but its hard to put my finger exactly on why. I suppose I feel you are ASSUMING a lot of things but without a good reason and giving advice rather than asking questions. I have found this to be a sign of someone lacking in wisdom if I may say so respectfully and with all due charity towards you. I mean that.

The monk who is my spiritual advisor is very advanced. I would say unusually so actually. He is the second spiritual advisor I have had who is like this. This first passed away 5 years into my journey and was profoundly close to God. Having a spiritual advisor who is a monk who can read souls is not in any way contradictory to having and needing repentance… the two are not mutually exclusive, and in my experience with him the two have been mutually beneficial.
 
franklinstower said:
I suppose I feel you are ASSUMING a lot of things but without a good reason and giving advice rather than asking questions.
Click to expand...
Forgive me - I should have spoken in first person plural - Not second person singular… And I should have asked, perhaps, as you suggest…

The problem is the scarcity of such people, and the large crowds they attract, each of them certain that only an enlightened Spiritual Elder is able to address their issues… One I know told of going to confession with such an elder who was/is his Spiritual Father, who simply sat him down, told him his sins, told him what to do about them, gave him absolution, and sent him away… And his repentance continues to this day…

For myself, much as I tried, I was unable to find such a Spiritual Father, and I simply availed our parish Priest and went on pilgrimages… These days, I am fairly persuaded that such an elder was not to be a part of my regimen… For others, perhaps…

I went to see Elder Ephraim, and all the jostling to get to the head of his line of seekers was just too much… And not seeing him, I was still able to get a 7 year quest from him, for he knows how to see us, and how to help by intervention not face to face… Almost like encountering a reposed Saint…

But the point is that it is easy to get lost in all the assorted “spiritualities” - Kind of like attending a banquet or smorgasbord of options for “spiritual development”… When there is really but one, and that one based on initial repentance unto Baptism, and then enhanced repentance after Baptism… And this is a very Orthodox understanding of Christian spirituality - eg The taking up of one’s cross in suffering in order to follow Christ to overcome th world… When this happens, then sometimes an enlightened elder can avail much, and will know what to do following an encounter therefrom with God…

Orthodox Spirituality is all about preparing for the Mystical Marriage of the Lamb, and that means purification of the heart, which has a lot of dimensions… “Blessed are the pure in heart, for they shall see God…”

Please forgive me for speaking presumptively…

geo
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top