Mystical Experience

[Bubba_Switzler]

I have never had a mystical experience praying, attending Mass, or reading Scripture.

I have, though, had mystical experiences reading non-religious books, visiting a shopping mall, listening to music, and watching a movie.

What ought I make of this (other than that I am not suited to a clerical vocation)?

 

[DavidFilmer]

Mysticism is an advanced (and widely misunderstood) stage of Catholic spirituality. As you have discerned, it is usually found among Catholic ministers and within dedicated religious communities - people who are able to focus almost all of their attention on God. The average guy in the pew will probably never experience a genuine mystical experience. And there’s nothing wrong with that.

If you desire this form of spirituality, know that it will be difficult to attain on your own. But not impossible. You should start with prayer, saying (at a minimum) the Divine Office each day. Then you should learn what it is and how it is properly applied in your life. I recommend Interior Castle and Ascent of Mt. Carmel by St. Theresa of Avila (a Carmelite Doctor of the Church who figured a lot of this stuff out).

You should also seek a Spiritual Director with a background in mysticism. Any Carmelite will do. Exploring Catholic mysticism without spiritual direction is not advised.

And know that it will likely take many years to achieve.

 

[Dorothy]

Mysticism is an advanced (and widely misunderstood) stage of Catholic spirituality. As you have discerned, it is usually found among Catholic ministers and within dedicated religious communities - people who are able to focus almost all of their attention on God. The average guy in the pew will probably never experience a genuine mystical experience. And there’s nothing wrong with that.

If you desire this form of spirituality, know that it will be difficult to attain on your own. But not impossible. You should start with prayer, saying (at a minimum) the Divine Office each day. Then you should learn what it is and how it is properly applied in your life. I recommend Interior Castle and Ascent of Mt. Carmel by St. Theresa of Avila (a Carmelite Doctor of the Church who figured a lot of this stuff out).

You should also seek a Spiritual Director with a background in mysticism. Any Carmelite will do. Exploring Catholic mysticism without spiritual direction is not advised.

And know that it will likely take many years to achieve.

Just one correction…St. John of the Cross wrote the “Ascent of Mount Carmel”.

 

[on_the_hill]

I have never had a mystical experience praying, attending Mass, or reading Scripture.

I have, though, had mystical experiences reading non-religious books, visiting a shopping mall, listening to music, and watching a movie.

What ought I make of this (other than that I am not suited to a clerical vocation)?

How do you define a mystical experience?

Why would you assume that not having had one makes you unsuited for the clergy? Do all clerics have mystical experiences?

 

[Beryllos]

How do you define a mystical experience?

I was wondering that too. When you mentioned reading a book, shopping, listening to music, and watching a movie, I thought perhaps you were referring to ecstasy (a state of overwhelming emotion), which I get all the time from music, books, and sometimes movies, but never shopping. Occasionally a passage of Scripture does it for me. I was also deeply moved once during the Laying of Hands at an Ordination.

 

[Mintaka]

First of all, God can give us special consolations or other mystical experiences whenever He feels like it. He owns everything in the world, right? So why shouldn’t He let someone see the mystical interconnections or the truth of the world when someone’s out at the mall?

Second, I don’t think that you should give any particular mind to whether you have these experiences at home, at the mall, at church, in the library, or wherever. Mother Teresa had the big mystical vision that directed her life when she was riding on a train. I think you would agree that she had a future in church work… and God didn’t direct her to start an order of train engineers or train passengers.

If you have a particular feeling or reasonable deduction that God wants you working in the world or in the Church (other than mystical experience locations), that would be fine and dandy. Otherwise, I wouldn’t be too quick to make assumptions.

The Ascent of Mount Carmel is a pretty helpful book, because it’s designed to let you take these things for what they are meant to be - helpful for your spiritual growth. Basically, God gave you a spiritual vitamin shot, and most of its effects aren’t in the content of the experience that you “felt” or “saw.” The vitamin shot is working away inside, where you don’t see it. Also, God gives such things on His own schedule, and He knows best. So there’s no point pining after them or over-analyzing them or trying to guess when you’ll have another one. Just be happy with what you got.

(Yeah, it’s pretty funny when mystics get all severely practical like that. One minute you’re reading their gorgeous poems, and the next minute they sound like they have all the sensitive soul of a hammer.)

 

[Bubba_Switzler]

How do you define a mystical experience?

Why would you assume that not having had one makes you unsuited for the clergy? Do all clerics have mystical experiences?

I was wondering that too. When you mentioned reading a book, shopping, listening to music, and watching a movie, I thought perhaps you were referring to ecstasy (a state of overwhelming emotion), which I get all the time from music, books, and sometimes movies, but never shopping. Occasionally a passage of Scripture does it for me. I was also deeply moved once during the Laying of Hands at an Ordination.

In each case, it was more than a vague feeling of ecstasy but less than a clear direction, or at least I never figured out the meaning of it. (The shopping mall experience was not while I was in the process of shopping but, rather, merely observing other people going about their shopping.) There are some commonalities which I have discerned and which are consistent with my chosen vocation and general interests.

My point, though, was that I never get this from anything formally religious (hence my comment about not being suited to the clergy). I like the Opus Dei idea of sanctifying lay work, which is probably closer.

 

[Bubba_Switzler]

If you have a particular feeling or reasonable deduction that God wants you working in the world or in the Church (other than mystical experience locations), that would be fine and dandy. Otherwise, I wouldn’t be too quick to make assumptions.

Well, this is sort of what I’m trying to figure out. How do you discern that?

The Ascent of Mount Carmel is a pretty helpful book, because it’s designed to let you take these things for what they are meant to be - helpful for your spiritual growth. Basically, God gave you a spiritual vitamin shot, and most of its effects aren’t in the content of the experience that you “felt” or “saw.” The vitamin shot is working away inside, where you don’t see it. Also, God gives such things on His own schedule, and He knows best. So there’s no point pining after them or over-analyzing them or trying to guess when you’ll have another one. Just be happy with what you got.

(Yeah, it’s pretty funny when mystics get all severely practical like that. One minute you’re reading their gorgeous poems, and the next minute they sound like they have all the sensitive soul of a hammer.)

That’s helpful, thanks. I assume you mean this:

amazon.com/Ascent-Mount-Carmel-John-Cross/dp/1935785982

 

[DavidFilmer]

Just one correction…St. John of the Cross wrote the “Ascent of Mount Carmel”.

Right, thanks for that. John of the Cross became a Doctor of the Church long before his mentor, St. Theresa of Avila - a fact which annoys my Carmelite wife (OCDS).

 

[Dorothy]

Right, thanks for that. John of the Cross became a Doctor of the Church long before his mentor, St. Theresa of Avila - a fact which annoys my Carmelite wife (OCDS).

Dorothy, Third Order Lay Carmelite

 

[Mystical_Seeker]

I have never had a mystical experience praying, attending Mass, or reading Scripture.

I have, though, had mystical experiences reading non-religious books, visiting a shopping mall, listening to music, and watching a movie.

What ought I make of this (other than that I am not suited to a clerical vocation)?

Maybe you’ve never had one because you have been engaged in vocally active expressions of prayer? (as opposed to silent, or contemplative prayer) It’s going into our “inner room” of where we can “stand down” to our usual busy train of thoughts.

When you’re doing things other than prayer, God can kind of sneak up and surprise you by taking the circumstances you are in at any given time, and allowing you to dwell in this consolation. But the Spirit speaks in “inexpressible groanings,” not necessarily through our speech processing center. So doing active prayer with a vocal “signal” that may rise in salience to the mind, above the “noise” where the subtle influences of the Spirit reside. For some people they get mystical experiences during active prayer, and for me I seldom do unless it’s in a very emotionally charged situation. Silence, for me, has done much good.

Rom 8
26 In the same way, the Spirit helps us in our weakness. We do not know what we ought to pray for, but the Spirit himself intercedes for us through wordless groans. 27 And he who searches our hearts knows the mind of the Spirit, because the Spirit intercedes for God’s people in accordance with the will of God.

CCC 2700-2724 covers the prayer forms, and note that there is more about contemplative prayer than about vocal and meditative, combined.

I bet if you check out this book it could change your outlook on prayer, and if you’re going to have one to set you up. It is written by a Jesuit, has imprimatur and Nihil Obstat, and is being used in some seminaries for beginning prayer classes.

It talks about three stages of prayer 1) talking at God, 2) talking to God, and 3) listening to God.

There is a Look Inside at Amazon: Armchair Mystic: Easing Into Contemplative Prayer Paperback – April 1, 2001
by Mark E. Thibodeaux S.J.

It is when you listen – and one way to learn is through contemplative prayer – that you set yourself up for true union with the prayer of Jesus.

CCC 2724 Contemplative prayer is the simple expression of the mystery of prayer. It is a gaze of faith fixed on Jesus, an attentiveness to the Word of God, a silent love. It achieves real union with the prayer of Christ to the extent that it makes us share in his mystery.

Vatican II emphasized holiness is for everyone, not just religious. Since then there have been various efforts by monks and nuns to communicate what they have learned about God and love, and the spiritual journey, to those of us with active lives. So we can gain benefit from what they have done.

 

[Bubba_Switzler]

Maybe you’ve never had one because you have been engaged in vocally active expressions of prayer? (as opposed to silent, or contemplative prayer) It’s going into our “inner room” of where we can “stand down” to our usual busy train of thoughts…

Undoubtely you are right and perhaps I was more in a listening mode in the other activities. I am exploring this further (per the other thread). Thanks for the additional tips.

Vatican II emphasized holiness is for everyone, not just religious. Since then there have been various efforts by monks and nuns to communicate what they have learned about God and love, and the spiritual journey, to those of us with active lives. So we can gain benefit from what they have done.

This is actually more my interest here, better understanding the relationship of lay and clerical calling. Setting aside the above possibilty that I’m just listening more in non-religious activities and contexts, what might that imply? (It could be a simple as mentioned about St. Theresa.)

 

[Deo_Gratias42]

The spiritual writers are very clear on this subject. We are not to seek out mystical experiences (the devil can mimic mystical experiences, which will get us in a heap of spiritual problems), and if we think we have had a mystical experience, before accepting it as being from God, we must subject it to a wise, holy and prudent confessor for examination. Should he say that it is not from God, we are to be obedient and take it as such. Even if the priest err’s in his judgment, we cannot go wrong with humble obedience.

Lastly, all are called to reach mystical contemplation, not just priests and nuns, etc. We must purify our souls in order to allow God to grant this gift to us. First we must eradicate all intentional venial sin (it is presumed the person lives consistantly in the state of grace and does not commit mortal sins), and then we must start working on purifying our senses and growing in virtue.

 

[Bubba_Switzler]

The spiritual writers are very clear on this subject. We are not to seek out mystical experiences (the devil can mimic mystical experiences, which will get us in a heap of spiritual problems), and if we think we have had a mystical experience, before accepting it as being from God, we must subject it to a wise, holy and prudent confessor for examination. Should he say that it is not from God, we are to be obedient and take it as such. Even if the priest err’s in his judgment, we cannot go wrong with humble obedience.

Lastly, all are called to reach mystical contemplation, not just priests and nuns, etc. We must purify our souls in order to allow God to grant this gift to us. First we must eradicate all intentional venial sin (it is presumed the person lives consistantly in the state of grace and does not commit mortal sins), and then we must start working on purifying our senses and growing in virtue.

All good advice, thanks. If there was any ambiguity in my previous posts let me clarify: I am not at this time claiming that my “mystical experiences” were from God. I am still pondering them.

 

[Vouthon]

Mysticism is one of the most misunderstood concepts in religion and especially so with reference to the Contemplative Tradition in Catholicism. Two very serious but common misconceptions have been voiced in this very thread. A study of the life and teachings of St. Catherine of Genoa would correct both.

DFilmer wrote:

Mysticism is an advanced (and widely misunderstood) stage of Catholic spirituality. As you have discerned, it is usually found among Catholic ministers and within dedicated religious communities - people who are able to focus almost all of their attention on God. The average guy in the pew will probably never experience a genuine mystical experience

With respect brother, this post of yours could be unintentionally misleading as a guide to the OP. There is nothing “advanced” about mystical prayer. Catholicism is not a Gnostic mystery religion. There are no secret gradations of knowledge held by magical ‘elites’. Mysticism is not about anything remotely of this sort. Nor is it something removed from the ‘ordinary’ life of prayer experienced by the average lay man or woman.

The Catechism states:

vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/archive/catechism/p4s1c3a1.htm

One cannot always meditate, but one can always enter into inner prayer, independently of the conditions of health, work, or emotional state. The heart is the place of this quest and encounter, in poverty ant in faith.

2713 Contemplative prayer is the simplest expression of the mystery of prayer. It is a gift, a grace; it can be accepted only in humility and poverty.

Bishop Hedley of Newport explains this very well. He was a great 19th century writer on contemplative prayer in the Catholic tradition:

Dublin Review, 1876, on the re-edition of Fr Baker’s Sancta Sophia or Holy Wisdom:

"…Contemplation is the queen and sovereign act among all the acts of the heart of man. For the perfect flower of the heart is the act of charity; and contemplation is charity or love when it is actual, constant, pure, and flowing under the pressure of the Holy Spirit, Contemplation is not ordinary prayer. Yet it is not one of those, extraordinary gifts which humble souls may not aspire to. It is the very aim of the teaching of Fr Baker and his school that ‘extraordinary’ prayer should be an ordinary state for Christian souls; for priests, for religious, for devout lay folk, and for the poor and unlearned who love God with all their heart. It is true that few arrive at true ‘interior’ prayer until after many years of patient exercise. But still, in the sense that, with due perseverance and by the help of God, it will come at last, we may say that it is ‘ordinary’.** It is thus that it differs from ecstasy, rapture, visions and other miraculous supernatural favours. These no one has a right to aspire to or expect.**…

Contemplation is the state in which ordinary prayer becomes perfect. It is not a miraculous state. It is merely the perfection of ordinary supernatural prayer; ordinary, in this sense, that God ordinarily gives it to those who remove obstacles and take the requisite means…"

St. Catherine of Genoa is one of the most venerated mystics and was the subject of a landmark text on the nature of the mystical experience, Baron Friedrich von Hügel’s classic work *The Mystical Element of Religion *(1908). She is considered by scholars of mysticism to be the example of this phenomenon par excellence. Yet she was not a nun, nor even a third order tertiary. Not once throughout her life did she ever join a religious order. She lived out her entire life as a married lay woman. She had her first genuine mystical experience during confession on 22 March 1473. She then went on to lead a completely active life of unselfish service to the sick in a hospital at Genoa, which she ran jointly with her husband.

Mystical experiences are life-changing but they are also life-affirming, not utterly removed from daily life. I profoundly disagree with anyone who would divorce mystical consciousness from everyday life. Every great mystic has done the exact opposite: they have found God or the divine in the most mundane and ordinary, as well as in the greatest. Brother Lawrence, a 17th century Roman Catholic mystic, had two life-changing mystical experiences one gazing at an old tree and the other working in his kitchen “amidst the pots and pans”.

That is why the Rhineland mystic Meister Eckhart once said:

“A person works in a stable.
That person has a breakthrough [mystical experience].
What does he do?
He returns to work in the stable.”

- Meister Eckhart (c. 1260 - c. 1327), German Catholic mystic

The mystic is no different from anyone else. He sees himself as being no different. If he was a worker in a stable, he returns to the stable - only that the stable now has a different significance for him, it becomes a meeting place with the Infinite.

No one expressed this better than William Blake:

To see a World in a Grain of Sand And a Heaven in a Wild Flower, Hold Infinity in the palm of your hand And Eternity in an hour

The Church does not agree with you that mystical prayer is “advanced”. Yes, the more committed one is to leading a true Christian life of prayer and servitude, of which our religious orders and their members are the pre-eminent example, the more likely one is to be ready to receive a mystical, contemplative experience when and if God deigns in his Majesty to make it so (He is the initiator of mystical experiences, not us). But this is not because it is ‘advanced’, nor should this discourage a layperson from heeding the universal call to contemplation.

 

[Vouthon]

This brings me on to my second point. Mysticism has nothing directly or innately to do with ‘paranormal’ or ‘visionary’ experiences. This is a very common misconception. It is not to be confused with apparitions, such as Marian apparitions, or the stigmata, or prophetic powers, miraculous cures, bilocation or any other extraordinary work of God.

The reason for the confusion is that some mystics have also, over and above their contemplative prayer lives, been granted by God these extraordinary gifts. These gifts, however, are not part of any mystical experience and many mystics have never had these sort of gifts.

From a 20th century scholar of mysticism, WT Stace:

“…The word mysticism" is popularly used in a variety of loose and inaccurate ways. Sometimes anything is called “mystical” which is misty, foggy, vague, or sloppy. It is absurd that “mysticism” should be associated with what is “misty” because of the similar sound of the words. And there is nothing misty, foggy, vague, or sloppy about mysticism.** A second absurd association is to suppose that mysticism is sort of mystery-mongering**. There is, of course, an etymological connection between “mysticism” and “mystery.” But mysticism is not any sort of hocus-pocus such as we commonly associate with claims to be the elucidation of sensational mysteries. Mysticism is not the same as what is commonly called the “occult”…Nor does it include what are commonly called parapsychological phenomena such as telepathy, telekinesis, clairvoyance, precognition. These are not mystical phenomena. It is perhaps true that mystics may sometimes claim to possess such special powers, but even when they do so they are well aware that such powers are not part of, and are to be clearly distinguished from, their mystical experience. (pp.10-11) Finally, it is most important to realize that visions and voices are not mystical phenomena, though here again it seems to be the case that the sort of persons who are mystics may often be the sort of persons who see visions and hear voices…And there are, one must add, good reasons for this. What mystics say is that a genuine mystical experience is nonsensuous. It is formless, shapeless, colorless, odorless, soundless. But a vision is a piece of visual imagery having color and shape. A voice is an auditory image. Visions and voices are sensuous experiences. (pp. 10-12)…”

Again let me turn to St. Catherine of Genoa to elucidate the reality of a mystical experience:

“…Faith seems to me wholly lost and hope dead; for it seems to me that I have and hold in certainty that which I believed and hoped in former times. I no longer see union, for I know nothing more and can see nothing more than Him alone without me. I do not know where the I is, nor do I seek it, nor do I wish to know or be cognizant of it. I am so plunged and submerged in the source of his infinite love, as if I were quite under water in the sea and could not touch, see, feel anything on any side except water…I see without eyes, and I hear without ears. I feel without feeling and taste without tasting. I know neither form nor measure; for without seeing I yet behold an operation so divine that the words I first used, perfection, purity, and the like, seem to me now mere lies in the presence of truth. . . . Nor can I any longer say, “My God, my all!” Everything is mine, for all that is God’s seem to be wholly mine. I am mute and lost in God…God so transforms the soul in Him that it knows nothing other than God; and He continues to draw it up into His fiery love until He restores it to that pure state from which it first issued…”

- Saint Catherine of Genoa (1447-1510), Italian Catholic mystic (Life, 50)

This is simply the culmination of a genuine life of prayer, detachment and virtue. It is a foretaste of the joy of the Beatific Vision. There are no visions, no miracles…nothing discernible with the senses.

 

[simple_soul]

This is simply the culmination of a genuine life of prayer, detachment and virtue. It is a foretaste of the joy of the Beatific Vision. There are no visions, no miracles…nothing discernible with the senses.

Hi Vouthon,

I was reading your posts here and was following along untill you said this. Emphasis mine.
When I read this in Light of what you quoted St. Catherine of Genoa I beleive I figured out something that tends to confuse me when I start reading people’s interpretaions or understandings of Mystycal writers…please don’t take this as me trying to say anything close to implying you don’t understand them, I know it is me who does not understand them and that is why I asking you this.

In the quote of St. Catherine of Genoa:

“…Faith seems to me wholly lost and hope dead; for it seems to me that I have and hold in certainty that which I believed and hoped in former times. I no longer see union, for I know nothing more and can see nothing more than Him alone without me. I do not know where the I is, nor do I seek it, nor do I wish to know or be cognizant of it. I am so plunged and submerged in the source of his infinite love, as if I were quite under water in the sea and could not touch, see, feel anything on any side except water…I see without eyes, and I hear without ears. I feel without feeling and taste without tasting. I know neither form nor measure; for without seeing I yet behold an operation so divine that the words I first used, perfection, purity, and the like, seem to me now mere lies in the presence of truth. . . . Nor can I any longer say, “My God, my all!” Everything is mine, for all that is God’s seem to be wholly mine. I am mute and lost in God…God so transforms the soul in Him that it knows nothing other than God; **and He continues to draw it up into His fiery love until He restores it to that pure state from which it first issued…” **

• Saint Catherine of Genoa (1447-1510), Italian Catholic mystic (Life, 50)

In the part I emphasized, my question is I f there were no senses involved why would she describe God’s love as a fiery love?

Please understand, I’m not trying to be fresh just trying to understand. To me it does not make sense that if no senses are involved in Mystical experiences then how would one know His, God’s, love was or is fiery?

 

[Mystical_Seeker]

In the part I emphasized, my question is I f there were no senses involved why would she describe God’s love as a fiery love?

We are tested and purified by fire. God gives us all we need.

 

[Aloysium]

. . . just trying to understand. To me it does not make sense that if no senses are involved in Mystical experiences then how would one know His, God’s, love was or is fiery?

:twocents:

If by the term understanding,
what is meant has to do with ideas, concepts and stuff that can be communicated,
you may be selling yourself short.

The yearning that lies at the core of who we are as human persons,
is not fulfilled by simply a mystical experience in itself,
which often can lead to spiritual pride,
let alone the possession of an intellectual description detached
from the one true relationship with God, who is ever-present.

This very moment God is here,
however wondrous or humdrum it all seems;
it is all fathomless mystery.
Our soul weaves together perceptions and thoughts
into this tapestry of every day life.

How amazing,
the mundane resting on eternity,
cries out for God.

 

[Vouthon]

Hi Vouthon,

I was reading your posts here and was following along untill you said this. Emphasis mine.
When I read this in Light of what you quoted St. Catherine of Genoa I beleive I figured out something that tends to confuse me when I start reading people’s interpretaions or understandings of Mystycal writers…please don’t take this as me trying to say anything close to implying you don’t understand them, I know it is me who does not understand them and that is why I asking you this.

In the quote of St. Catherine of Genoa:

In the part I emphasized, my question is I f there were no senses involved why would she describe God’s love as a fiery love?

Please understand, I’m not trying to be fresh just trying to understand. To me it does not make sense that if no senses are involved in Mystical experiences then how would one know His, God’s, love was or is fiery?

Dear Simple Soul

You have a wonderful name. Please don’t be afraid to criticize or question my assumptions (I’m wrong a lot I assure you!), even though I am fully aware that you aren’t in this instance anyhow.

The fire is a ‘symbol’ employed by many mystical writers. It is an ‘interior’ fire that they speak of, a soul ‘burning’ with the love of God. If I may quote from the “Life” of St. Catherine of Genoa to illustrate what she means by the “fire”. In this example, Catherine is described by her confessor

catholicfirst.com/thefait…inegenoa2.html

She felt herself drawn with St. John, to rest on the bosom of her loving Lord, and there she discovered a sweeter way which contained in itself many secrets of the bounteous love which was consuming her, so that she was often beside herself; and in her intense eagerness, her hatred of self, and her deep contrition, she would lick the earth with her tongue, and so great was the wain of contrition, and the sweetness of love, that she knew not what she was doing; but she felt her heart lightened, occupied with unbounded, poignant grief, and the sweet ardor of love.** Thus she remained for three years or more, melted with love and grief, and with the deep and burning flames that were consuming her heart**.

…This impression remained for many years which were spent by her, in continual sighs, and burning flames, so that her heart and soul were well nigh melted, and she was constrained to cry out: “I have no longer either soul or heart; but my soul and my heart are those of my Beloved;” and in him she was wholly absorbed and transformed.

Finally, her sweet and loving Lord drew her to himself, and bestowed upon her a caress, by the power of which she was entirely immersed in that sweet Divinity to which she abandoned herself exteriorly, so that she exclaimed: “I live no longer, but Christ lives in me.” She knew no longer whether her mere human acts were good or bad, but saw all things in God.

Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI spoke about St. Catherine’s experiences in one of his general audience addresses thus:

vatican.va/holy_father/benedict_xvi/audiences/2011/documents/hf_ben-xvi_aud_20110112_en.html

Catherine, however, did not see purgatory as a scene in the bowels of the earth: for her it is not an exterior but rather an interior fire. This is purgatory: an inner fire…We heard of the moment of conversion when Catherine suddenly became aware of God’s goodness, of the infinite distance of her own life from this goodness and of a burning fire within her. And this is the fire that purifies, the interior fire of purgatory. Here too is an original feature in comparison with the thought of her time.

St. Catherine, like all mystics, was confronted with ineffability, the incapacity of an individual to adequately express in words what they have ‘experienced’, which is one of the hallmarks of a ‘mystical experience’. Thus we find her exclaim:

“…I have no longer either soul or heart; but my soul and my heart are those of my Beloved. I live no longer, but Christ lives in me. My self is God, nor is any other self known to me except God. Oh Love! can it be that you have called me with so much love, and revealed to me at one view, what no tongue can describe? So long as any one can speak of divine things, enjoy and understand them, remember and desire them, he has not yet arrived in port; yet there are ways and means to guide him hither. Words are wholly inadequate to express my meaning, and I reproach myself for using them. I would that every one could understand me, and I am sure that if I could breathe on creatures, the fire of love burning within me would inflame them all with divine desire…”

- Saint Catherine of Genoa (1447 – 1510), Catholic mystic

Consider this sentence from the passage I quoted in my last post:

I see without eyes, and I hear without ears. I feel without feeling and taste without tasting. I know neither form nor measure; for without seeing I yet behold an operation so divine that the words I first used, perfection, purity, and the like, seem to me now mere lies in the presence of truth

This is the ‘crux’ so to speak, where St. Catherine struggles to try and explain to her audience in sensual terms cognizable to their understanding what was for her an entirely non-sensuous experience. Can you imagine seeing without eyes, hearing without ears, feeling without feeling, tasting without tasting yet being aware of something so amazing, so “divine” that every word you previously would have used to explain it is incapable of capturing it adequately? That is a mystical experience of union with God. Words and images can never do it justice.