Mystics and doctrine?

[ZenFred]

It seems to me that Catholic mystics seem to skirt doctrine and not necessarily hold orthodox views. They tend to place a higher focus on the experience of the presence of God and place doctrinal issues as irrelevant or not knowable. Would this a be fair characterization? I had always viewed the Catholic Church as being fairly dogmatic in terms of adherence to doctrine, yet the mystics seem very much on their own path yet respected none-the-less.

Don’t you have to agree to catechism to be a Catholic?

Thanks
-Fred

 

[frobert]

It seems to me that Catholic mystics seem to skirt doctrine and not necessarily hold orthodox views. They tend to place a higher focus on the experience of the presence of God and place doctrinal issues as irrelevant or not knowable. Would this a be fair characterization? I had always viewed the Catholic Church as being fairly dogmatic in terms of adherence to doctrine, yet the mystics seem very much on their own path yet respected none-the-less.

Don’t you have to agree to catechism to be a Catholic?

Thanks
-Fred

I have limited knowledge of the doctrines, but I think you have it about right. Catholic mystics put a higher focus on seeking to experience the divine presence and probably pray that God will help them understand the doctrines. The church has a rich history of mystics but I think the present church is ambivalent; there does not appear to be any discipline to follow; or a someone to go to for instructions.

Saint Thomas’s mystical experience recorded in Thurston and Attwater revision of Alban Butler’s Lives of the Saints, is described in this way:
"On the feast of St. Nicholas [in 1273, Aquinas] was celebrating Mass when he received a revelation that so affected him that he wrote and dictated no more, leaving his great work the Summa Theologiae unfinished. To Brother Reginald’s (his secretary and friend) expostulations he replied, “The end of my labors has come. All that I have written appears to be as so much straw after the things that have been revealed to me.” When later asked by Reginald to return to writing, Aquinas said, “I can write no more. I have seen things that make my writings like straw.” "

It would appear that in the last 2 years of his life, St Thomas total focus was on experience.

 

[Aloysium]

. . . It would appear that in the last 2 years of his life, St Thomas total focus was on experience.

Perhaps his total focus was on God.

 

[TRH1292]

It seems to me that Catholic mystics seem to skirt doctrine and not necessarily hold orthodox views. They tend to place a higher focus on the experience of the presence of God and place doctrinal issues as irrelevant or not knowable. Would this a be fair characterization? I had always viewed the Catholic Church as being fairly dogmatic in terms of adherence to doctrine, yet the mystics seem very much on their own path yet respected none-the-less.

Don’t you have to agree to catechism to be a Catholic?

Thanks
-Fred

Could you give an example of a mystic that does not adhere to the doctrine of the Church?

 

[catholicscot]

Mystics are often viewed with some suspicion during their lifetimes because the language which they use do describe encounters which are beyond the power of language to describe can be very different from that used in less ecstatic approaches to the faith. I think they (we?) might make the case that doctrine, liturgy and the sacraments are steps which lead us towards encounters with the Divine and mystics describe the end result of these steps without always feeling the need to explain how it was that they arrived at these experiences.

The Desert Fathers and others have left us a treasury of warnings about the dangers of spiritual pride that flow from mystical experiences if the mystic believes that they have achieved them by their own merits or that having achieved them they can leave aside the sacraments and discipline of the Church as if they no longer needed them. Tauler suggested that if one was deep in an encounter with God one could defer saying their Office until it was over but that they should not dispense with it altogether. The first suggestion would be offensive to those who are perhaps too legalistic, the second is a check to pride because it reminds the mystic that they need the daily bread of the Church at least as much as the Champagne of the Divine encounter.

In my blog recently I posted a quote from Guerric of Igny about scripture reading but it could apply to any of the liturgical and sacramental acts of the Church

Search the Scriptures. For you are not mistaken in thinking that you find life in them…From these gardens the Bridegroom will lead you, if I be not mistaken, into others where rest is more hidden and enjoyment more blessed and beauty more wonderful. When you are absorbed in his praises with accents of exultation and thanksgiving, he will take you into his wonderful tenting place, into the very house of God, into the unapproachable light in which he dwells, where he feeds, where he lies down at midday.

 

[catholicscot]

Ah, yes, this is the kind of thing I had in mind

Ah, dear children, how happy is the man whose outward piety is no obstacle to his interior progress in perfection — happy, indeed, and holy, for two good things are better than one. If, therefore, thou perceivest that any outward observance hinders thy inward recollection, give up the outward and concentrate thy soul upon the interior life with all thy might. This pleases God better. Do as we priests do in our monasteries at Easter and Pentecost; for then our vocal prayers are greatly shortened, in order that the holy interior spirit of these festivals may be the better enjoyed. Thus do you, when God invites you to the high festival of His inner visitation, so that leaving off some of your external devotions, you may be the more intently engaged with Him in your soul’s inmost depths — there He will accomplish His dearest will with you. In such case thou mayest confine thyself to those outward exercises of religion that are required of thee, as, for example, by the rule of thy order, and boldly cut off all the rest — supposing them to impede thy interior recollection.

Johannes Tauler

To answer your question about the Catechism. To be a Catholic you must hold as true those things which the Church has declared definitively to be true. Or, if you are not aware of all the doctrines of the Church, you must give your assent to the authority of the Church such that you believe her by virtue of the guidance of the Holy Spirit to be infallible in questions of faith and morals whenever she does make such rulings.

However, the notion that the Church micromanages belief is far from accurate. There are whole areas of theological speculation and mystical exploration where the Church has not enunciated a binding doctrine. Moreover there are positions which the Church takes on day to day issues, such as the invasion of Iraq or the treatment of illegal immigrants, which flow from Catholic principles but depend upon the prudential judgements made about a situation. These positions may be in error either because principles have been incorrectly applied or, more likely, because a full knowledge of the facts has not been available when arriving at a policy position.

 

[ZenFred]

Great responses thanks!

I find the Christians mystics resonate deeply with me and have a similar approach to my Zen practice. The point of writing is to express poetically and through analogy what can’t be expressed and the focus of everything is on the experience of God. Everything else is straw as St. Thomas said and he was one of the greatest doctrinal theologians of all time.

I also agree that unchecked spirituality is very dangerous. The search for God must be one in which the focus is taken off the self. In Zen, if we encounter a vision of any kind during meditation we are supposed to ignore it and continue with meditation. We might gain insight but insight is not our goal, it is that experience of God (satori).

By the way, I appreciate the Catholic position on the war in Iraq as I fought there and know first hand how much of a terrible mistake that was. It is amazing the terrible things we will do when we think we are right.

Thank you all for you posts -Fred

 

[frobert]

Perhaps his total focus was on God.

Agreed, that is a definition of a mystic.Well actually the mystic doesn’t focus at all he/she experiences the creator.

Those who have experienced that radiance of the Father’s love, He will be saved ( Kabir - a mystic poet.)

 

[Granum_Frumenti]

Mystics are often viewed with some suspicion during their lifetimes because the language which they use do describe encounters which are beyond the power of language to describe can be very different from that used in less ecstatic approaches to the faith. I think they (we?) might make the case that doctrine, liturgy and the sacraments are steps which lead us towards encounters with the Divine and mystics describe the end result of these steps without always feeling the need to explain how it was that they arrived at these experiences.

As I looked through this thread, I was reminded of a recent thread, “Meister Eckhart and Catholicism,” in which we read,

Eckhart often speaks from inside the mystical experience of union with God. In this respect some of his statements can seem auto-theistic or pantheistic. He speaks of how one feels during the unio mystica when the lines between Lover and Beloved become indistinct from the perspective of the person experiencing it, even while they remain different from God in essence. If one were to read these statements straight, nonetheless, one could think that he was claiming to be God.

Someone else posts about wanting to hear more on the subject (as do I), but so far the thread ends there. I’d like to hear more because I find the topic interesting, and maybe here we have a different chance for people to offer their thoughts.

P.S. That thread also quotes Johannes Tauler!

 

[frobert]

The Desert Fathers and others have left us a treasury of warnings about the dangers of spiritual pride that flow from mystical experiences if the mystic believes that they have achieved them by their own merits or that having achieved them they can leave aside the sacraments and discipline of the Church as if they no longer needed them. Tauler suggested that if one was deep in an encounter with God one could defer saying their Office until it was over but that they should not dispense with it altogether. The first suggestion would be offensive to those who are perhaps too legalistic, the second is a check to pride because it reminds the mystic that they need the daily bread of the Church at least as much as the Champagne of the Divine encounter.

In my blog recently I posted a quote from Guerric of Igny about scripture reading but it could apply to any of the liturgical and sacramental acts of the Church

Indeed, the Desert Fathers were correct in their warnings. They do appear to realize and accept that the reality of mystical experiences, even their goodness, but they failed in gathering together the mystics of the day to develop a discipline to avoid the very pitfalls that they warn against. We can not imagine how much better “the daily bread of the church” is to those who have the gift of mysticism.

 

[frobert]

Someone else posts about wanting to hear more on the subject (as do I), but so far the thread ends there. I’d like to hear more because I find the topic interesting, and maybe here we have a different chance for people to offer their thoughts.

What more would you like to hear on mysticism? I think a thread like this can increase our knowledge and help those of us inclined to a mystical path. I know I would like to hear something more positive and inquiring from the church itself. Certainly the CC is correct in its cautioning but leaves the implication that this is an improper path in seeking to know God. The CC in its ambivalence it appears not to have a understanding that we all have a mystical nature, some more than others.

 

[frobert]

Great responses thanks!

I find the Christians mystics resonate deeply with me and have a similar approach to my Zen practice. The point of writing is to express poetically and through analogy what can’t be expressed and the focus of everything is on the experience of God. Everything else is straw as St. Thomas said and he was one of the greatest doctrinal theologians of all time.

I also agree that unchecked spirituality is very dangerous. The search for God must be one in which the focus is taken off the self. In Zen, if we encounter a vision of any kind during meditation we are supposed to ignore it and continue with meditation. We might gain insight but insight is not our goal, it is that experience of God (satori).

By the way, I appreciate the Catholic position on the war in Iraq as I fought there and know first hand how much of a terrible mistake that was. It is amazing the terrible things we will do when we think we are right.

Thank you all for you posts -Fred

Fred, from your experience with Zen, are there writings, teachings or references that are similar in magnitude to the “dark night of the soul” that several Christian and Catholic mystics have written about?

 

[Vouthon]

I’d like to hear more because I find the topic interesting

Sure thing

To use the schema drawn up by St. Teresa of Avila (and mind there are no clear-cut definitions of spiritual states, this would vary between persons) contemplation is broadly divided up into acquired contemplation and infused contemplation and subdivided again within these broad categories into: (1) vocal prayer, (2) meditation, (3) affective prayer, (4) prayer of simplicity, (5) infused contemplation, (6) prayer of quiet, (7) prayer of union, (8) prayer of conforming union, and (9) prayer of transforming union.

Acquired contemplation begins with “affective prayer” and ends at the “infused” stage (5).

Acquired contemplation can be attained through human effort aided by grace.

Infused contemplative prayer, or “the God-seeing life” is the most perfect and it cannot be attained by human effort, rather only God when He finds us ready.

Read:

"…Further, you must know that if this spiritual man would now become a God-seeing man, he needs must have three other things. The first is the feeling that the foundation of his being is abysmal, and he should possess it in this manner; the second is that his inward exercise should be wayless; the third is that his indwelling should be a divine fruition.

Now understand, you who would live in the spirit, for I am speaking to no one else. The union with God which a spiritual man feels, when the union is revealed to the spirit as being abysmal—that is, measureless depth, measureless height, measureless length and measureless breadth—in this manifestation the spirit perceives that through love it has plunged itself into the depth and has ascended into the height and escaped into the length; and it feels itself to be wandering in the breadth, and to dwell in a knowledge which is ignorance. And through this intimate feeling of union, it feels itself to be melting into the Unity; and, through dying to all things, into the life of God. And there it feels itself to be one life with God. And this is the foundation, and the first point, of the God-seeing life.

And from this there arises the second point, which is an exercise above reason and without condition: for the Divine Unity, of which every God-seeing spirit has entered into possession in love, eternally draws and invites the Divine Persons and all loving spirits into its self. And this inward drawing is felt by each lover, more or less, according to the measure of his love and the manner of his exercise. And whosoever yields himself to this indrawing, and keeps himself therein, cannot fall into mortal sin. But the God-seeing man who has forsaken self and all things, and does not feel himself drawn away because he no longer possesses anything as his own, but stands empty of all, he can always enter, naked and unencumbered with images, into the inmost part of his spirit. There he finds revealed an Eternal Light, and in this light, he feels the eternal demand of the Divine Unity; and he feels himself to be an eternal fire of love, which craves above all else to be one with God. The more he yields to this indrawing or demand, the more he feels it. And the more he feels it, the more he craves to be one with God; for it urges him to pay the debt which is demanded of him by God. This eternal demand of the Divine Unity kindles within the spirit an eternal fire of love; and though the spirit incessantly pays the debt, an eternal burning continues within it. For, in the transformation within the Unity, all spirits fail in their own activity, and feel nothing else but a burning up of themselves in the simple Unity of God. This simple Unity of God none can feel or possess save he who maintains himself in the immeasurable radiance, and in the love which is above reason and wayless. In this transcendent state the spirit feels in itself the eternal fire of love; and in this fire of love it finds neither beginning nor end, and it feels itself one with this fire of love. The spirit for ever continues to burn in itself, for its love is eternal; and it feels itself ever more and more to be burnt up in love, for it is drawn and transformed into the Unity of God, where the spirit burns in love. If it observes itself, it finds a distinction and an otherness between itself and God; but where it is burnt up it is undifferentiated and without distinction, and therefore it feels nothing but unity; for the flame of the Love of God consumes and devours all that it can enfold in its Self.

And thus you may see that the indrawing Unity of God is nought else than the fathomless Love, which lovingly draws inward, in eternal fruition, the Father and the Son and all that lives in Them. And in this Love we shall burn and be burnt up without end, throughout eternity; for herein lies the blessedness of all spirits. And therefore we must all found our lives upon a fathomless abyss; that we may eternally plunge into Love, and sink down in the fathomless Depth. And with that same Love, we shall ascend, and transcend ourselves, in the incomprehensible Height. And in that Love which is wayless, we shall wander and stray, and it shall lead us and lose us in the immeasurable Breadth of the Love of God. And herein we shall flee forth and flee out of ourselves, into the unknown raptures of the Goodness and Riches of God. And therein we shall melt and be melted away, and shall eternally wander and sojourn within the Glory of God. Behold! by each of these images, I show forth to God-seeing men their being and their exercise, but none else can understand them. For the contemplative life cannot be taught. But where the Eternal Truth reveals Itself within the spirit all that is needful is taught and learnt…"

***- Blessed John of Ruysbroeck (1293 – 1381), The Sparkling Stone ***

Full text: saints.sqpn.com/the-sparkling…van-ruysbroek/

 

[catholicscot]

The point of writing is to express poetically and through analogy what can’t be expressed and the focus of everything is on the experience of God.

Thank you all for you posts -Fred

I think that it is wise to seek to encounter God but unwise to seek out ‘experiences’ of Him. Being rapt out of oneself in an ecstatic state is a very intense experience and it is a temptation and a distraction to seek for such a thing. We should accept it with gratitude if the Lord in His goodness sends it but it is not the object of our spiritual exercises. We aim to achieve as perfect a Union with Him as we can, and that means encountering Him in all the ways of which we are capable including in the depths of darkness when we see Him not and in the desert when all we feel is thirst and weariness. An essential part of the road towards Union is the recognition that In His apparent absence He is as near to us and we to Him as in the moments where He sends us the sweetness of His consolations.

One way of formulating the path of the Catholic mystic is to think about it in terms of the Purgative, Illuminative and Unitive parts of the journey, here summarised by Reginald Garrigou-Legrange

I) The purgative way or stage, proper to beginners, in which it is a question of the active purification of the external and internal senses, of the passions, of the intellect, and of the will, by mortification, meditation, prayer; and finally, it is a question of the passive purification of the senses, in which infused contemplation begins and by means of which the soul is raised to the illuminative way, as St. John of the Cross says.

1. The illuminative way or state, proper to proficients, in which, after a preliminary chapter on the divisions of contemplation, are discussed the gifts of the Holy Ghost and infused contemplation, which proceeds principally from the gifts of understanding and wisdom, and which is declared desirable for all interior souls, as being morally necessary for the full perfection of Christian life. This second part of the work, after several articles relating to extraordinary graces (visions, revelations, interior words), ends with a chapter of nine articles relative to the passive purification of the spirit, which marks the passage to the unitive way. This again is what St. John of the Cross taught.

1. The unitive life or stage, proper to the perfect, in which it is a question of the intimate union of the contemplative soul with God and of its degrees up to the transforming union.

Zen, I know, is clear about shedding our attachment to the material samsaric world but unlike Christianity (or Amida Buddhism) has no notion, I think I’m right in saying, of infused contemplation or external help by way of God’s Grace. Therefore attaining satori flows from our own efforts as a necessary consequence of them as opposed to achieving Union because transforming Love has cast the lover into the arms of the Beloved in the tenderest of embraces. This I think is a clear difference.

 

[Vouthon]

I think that it is wise to seek to encounter God but unwise to seek out ‘experiences’ of Him.

Very true!

If one undertakes acquired contemplation, the goal should not be “experience” but rather “communion” with God, so as to reach a state of perpetual prayer and adoration. Infused contemplation, on the other hand, cannot be attained by any human effort. It is a totally gratuitous gift from God. All we can do is “prepare” for the coming of our Bridegroom through leading a pure and holy life, partaking of the sacraments and doing deeds of charity. When and if we are ready, God will reveal Himself within us.

It should be noted that mystical “experiences” do not consist of visions or miraculous phenomena.

Some mystics such as Blessed Elizabeth of the Trinity never once had a single vision or supernatural experience.

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)…”

These types of experiences should never be “sought” after.

Contemplative prayer, however, which is mysticism, is open to everyone:

"… 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. The whole progress of the ‘art’ of prayer is supernatural, and depends on the ever-present help of God, Yet because this help, or grace, is always ready, and (up to a certain, not easily determined, point) a matter upon which man may calculate with certainty, we may proceed in our speculation concerning prayer almost as if it were a natural art, depending for its perfection upon the energy of the human will in asceticism and concentration. Not that any one advances in prayer unless, amongst other things, he is fully impressed that God alone can give him the gift of prayer. But the laws of Gods gifts and of His grace have become, as a fact, not as a right, the laws of the human soul, when the soul is regenerate. The end and object of the man of prayer is to attain to contemplation. Yet here we must make careful reservations. We may desire and sigh for contemplation; yet we must be well aware that, in ourselves, we have no power or means to attain to it; and we must not conceal from ourselves that even the virtues and gifts of a sanctified soul do not give us directly the key which will admit us to contemplation…

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. Contemplation is a great and a ‘perfect’ state of prayer. To arrive at it, sanctifying or habitual grace is not enough; faith, hope, and charity are not enough; there is also required that touch of the finger of God’s right hand, and that quick response of the soul thereto, which imply the active operation of the seven great gifts of the Holy Ghost. And among the gifts which confer the privilege of contemplation gifts which every one not in mortal sin possesses, but which so few stir up within them the chief are, the gift of knowledge, the gift of understanding, and the gift of wisdom. It is the Gifts of the Holy Spirit which pour on the soul that exquisite and subtle light, that rapture of attention, that spiritual sensibility, as if new senses had been given us, which combine to elevate ordinary meditation and affection into contemplation…"

- Bishop Hedley of Newport (Dublin Review, 1876)

 

[Aloysium]

. . . Therefore attaining satori flows from our own efforts as a necessary consequence of them as opposed to achieving Union because transforming Love has cast the lover into the arms of the Beloved in the tenderest of embraces. This I think is a clear difference.

Corroborated by the previous quote by Vouthon:

. . . And in that Love which is wayless, we shall wander and stray, and it shall lead us and lose us in the immeasurable Breadth of the Love of God. And herein we shall flee forth and flee out of ourselves, into the unknown raptures of the Goodness and Riches of God. And therein we shall melt and be melted away, and shall eternally wander and sojourn within the Glory of God. Behold! by each of these images, I show forth to God-seeing men their being and their exercise, but none else can understand them. For the contemplative life cannot be taught. But where the Eternal Truth reveals Itself within the spirit all that is needful is taught and learnt…" - Blessed John of Ruysbroeck

We exist in relation to an eternal God, who draws us into His love. We are not God, we come to know and commune with Him by answering His call to love.

 

[Bookcat]

It seems to me that Catholic mystics seem to skirt doctrine and not necessarily hold orthodox views.

Doctrine is quite important --even for mystics…

It is firm foundation of their relationship with God.

 

[Vouthon]

Zen, I know, is clear about shedding our attachment to the material samsaric world but unlike Christianity (or Amida Buddhism) has no notion, I think I’m right in saying, of infused contemplation or external help by way of God’s Grace. Therefore attaining satori flows from our own efforts as a necessary consequence of them as opposed to achieving Union because transforming Love has cast the lover into the arms of the Beloved in the tenderest of embraces. This I think is a clear difference.

You are quite correct, this is indeed the most important distinction between the Catholic and Oriental mysticisms.

Nevertheless, do not forget that our stage of “acquired contemplation” is a partially self-attained state of awareness of God’s presence. Infused contemplation is the highest manifestation of contemplative prayer, yet contemplation is a broader category that is inclusive of human effort impelled by divine grace at the lower levels.

As Pope St. Gregory the Great explained in relation to this “acquired contemplation”:

“…There is in contemplation a great effort of the mind, when it raises itself up to heavenly things, when it fixes its attention on spiritual things, when it tries to pass over all that is outwardly seen, when it narrows itself that it may be enlarged. And sometimes indeed it prevails and soars above the resisting darkness of its blindness, so that it attains to somewhat of the unencompassed Light…Such a soul, when it strives to contemplate God, as if placed in a wrestle, now comes uppermost, because by understanding and feeling it tastes somewhat of the unemcompassed Light…”

***- St. Pope Gregory the Great (540 – 604), Church Father & Doctor of the Church ***

His statement would not make sense in the context of “infused contemplation” where there is no human effort at all. As you can see, “acquired contemplation” only results in a soul tasting “somewhat of the unencompassed Light” whereas Ruysbroeck, describing unmerited infused contemplation, is plunged directly into the eternal love of the Holy Trinity and loses himself entirely to God.

Here is the definition of “acquired contemplation” from Fr. John Hardon’s Modern Catholic Dictionary (he was the founder of CAF):

ACQUIRED CONTEMPLATION

The prayer of simple recollection, in which acts of the mind and will are the result of a person’s own effort aided by grace, and helped by the gifts of knowledge, wisdom, and understanding coming from the Holy Spirit, so that the mind and will remain fixed on God

catholicculture.org/cultu…x.cfm?id=31624

In simple terms, we could say that Catholic spirituality falls into three categories:

1. discursive meditation (using images, thoughts, words)
2. acquired contemplation (one’s own effort aided by grace to quietly focus the mind solely on God without imagining Him)
3. infused contemplation (a pure gift from God that renders the use of the soul’s faculties silent).

The key difference, therefore, between our contemplation (in the broad sense) and Zen meditation, is not that the former is wholly unmerited and the latter wholly merited, but rather it consists of the fact that even where human effort - for example to resist temptations, disturbing mental images, performing acts of charity and periods of stillness or even hesychastic breathing exercises to focus the mind on God - is involved, it is never alone. God’s grace even at these lower levels is present and necessary for any spiritual movement, whereas this external divine agent does not exist or picture at all for Zen Buddhists.

I say this so that we do not create too far a chasm between the two mysticisms, while being cognizant of the uniqueness of our own.

 

[Bookcat]

It can be noted that there is acquired contemplation…and infused contemplation.

And to confuse things (unintentionally) there are various authors and various schools who use term “contemplation” differently…in their writings (over the centuries)

(and I am meaning here even only those who writers and schools that do not depart from faithfulness to the Church or who are not Christians to begin with -the term gets used in various ways among them as well).

---

Though a basic outline that I use to explain things is that it can be said that there is acquired contemplation --which can be on a philosophical level (read Josef Pieper on “natural contempation”) or on the theological level …and there can be even the ordinary kind like that of a mother “contemplating” her sleeping child or our contemplating nature. These are a true contemplation.

And there can be “acquired contemplation” in the sense of a kind of contemplation in prayer where things become usually after one has lived a life of prayer for some time - amore of a intuitive gaze (to look and love) etc (such as prayer of simplicity) (within which too God might begin to give infused contemplation as well).

And then there is “infused contemplation”…infused by God. Which also involves looking and loving.

---

But as I noted --there is various different orthodox uses of the terms over the centuries and various schools…

 

[Bookcat]

Interesting article: zenit.org/en/articles/interior-prayer-founded-on-loving-much

(more on him: frjacquesphilippe.com/book/time-god)

(he mentions differences between prayer and Buddhist practices…)