The Cloud of Unknowing & Contemplative Prayer

[Mystical_Seeker]

OK I started another thread with anti-Rohr bait in the title, so the Rohr-bashing party can move to that venue.

The thread: Rohr video: What did Jesus Really Teach?

Rohr-bashing in that thread is restricted to content related to the content of the video, but I provided a video that should have enough scary stuff for just about any Truly Good Catholic to become enraged or fearful, and attack.

Please feel free to start Rohr-bashing threads of your own, if you have material that does not fit into an existing bashthread.

I intend to post more from Rohr in the future, so you will have plenty of chances to vilify him.

MS

 

[fred_conty]

No, not really. But perhaps you don’t quite understand what these terms mean.

Here are good definitions of each, from Fr. John Hardon’s Modern Catholic Dictionary:

catholicculture.org/culture/library/dictionary/index.cfm?id=31624

catholicculture.org/culture/library/dictionary/index.cfm?id=34205

In short (and somewhat imperfectly), aquired contemptlation is from our own efforts (but still with God’s grace) and we are active in it, while infused contemplation is through God’s working in us and we are passive in it (though cooperating).

Thank you for your kind explanation…it helps. Tho it almost seems that the definition of acquired would fit meditation.

May the Good Shepherd fill you with peace.

 

[InLight247]

Hey .come on…I know it is late at night…lets cool our jets

As for the OP - I do not comment on his information - **it is something likely he found quickly in a search -after recalling that Fr. Rohr is a problematic figure. I believe he is well intentioned as I hope we all here are. **

There are though real concerns. One can discuss the matter with the Apologists at Catholic Answers (our hosts here!)- they can relay to you what the various problematic aspects of his Teachings etc are. He has been mentioned a number of times over the years on the Catholic Answers radio show.

Here is from one of the Apologists from this time last year (perhaps something has changed in a year…but I cannot say):

Jun 10, '14, 2:44 pm

Fr. Vincent Serpa
Catholic Answers Apologist

Hi,

Fr. Richard Rohr is a Franciscan who seems to have really fallen off the rails with regard to his fidelity to the teachings of the Catholic Church. I would never encourage anyone to go on one of his retreats.

catholicculture.org/culture/library/view.cfm?id=3611&CFID=59882772&CFTOKEN=73063193

Fr. Vincent Serpa, O.P.

forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?p=12073470&highlight=rohr#post12073470

You got it correct there. I always know Rohr is controversial, but have never read his writings. Among many articles from the quick internet search, I posted the one from the bishops. The link from Fr. Vincent Serpa you provided is directly from CAF, right here on this forum. That tells a lot.
forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?p=12073470&highlight=rohr#post12073470

I am often amazed how people could claim to be contemplative but act explosively without any charity.

 

[Mystical_Seeker]

You got it correct there. I always know Rohr is controversial, but have never read his writings. Among many articles from the quick internet search, I posted the one from the bishops. The link from Fr. Vincent Serpa you provided is directly from CAF, right here on this forum. That tells a lot.
forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?p=12073470&highlight=rohr#post12073470

I am often amazed how people could claim to be contemplative but act explosively without any charity.

Yes it does say a lot, but I don’t know what. As much as I like and respect Fr. Serpa, I have followed this for several years, I can’t defer to him on this. Given the level of divisions I’ve come to see in the last 10 years or so, I also do not fault him for it. There are sources that should be reliable for research, that contain a mix of truth and lies – people like me see the lies, people who hate him have the true parts to use to back themselves up. So now I don’t even take the word of a single apologist for anything in particular; they are human just like the rest of us, and they do their best and provide great service. My own pastor is a very strong advocate of Rohr, although the last one wasn’t.

Go figure. My last pastor banned me from the parish (except to come play music for Mass – I did get to keep my job) because my mental illness was “scaring people” – he liked things in order and this he referred to as “his German.” I liked him for the most part, but then my son in high school vowed not to give anything to the Church who treated his dad this way. Funny; we got a pastor who embraced me and nurtured me back to sanity and spiritual growth, and now my son is halfway to the priesthood. Amazing what “inclusiveness” can do for a person.

I actually was inquiring with the Franciscans for about a year and then quit, but this month I’m going back after reading Rohr’s new book – his first about Franciscans even though he’s written many – and now I see that I have a place in this Church. Even within the ranks of the Franciscans, there are a very small minority who are fearful and loud, around who we cannot even have a decent discussion because it just can’t happen.

That’s one of the reasons I quit. Why should I join the Franciscans, when we can’t even have a rational discussion there about the particular Franciscan friar whose work has helped me more than any other Franciscan and part of why I even wanted to inquire? I can come here and get that. The formation director and our local ministry totally understood that, but the member in our chapter is a long-term, well-respected, and genuinely amazing and nice lady.

But after reading about Francis’s strategy regarding issues he had with the Church, and how that all played out, once again I think I have a place there so I’m going back. Why should I sit down and let fear trump what I may have to say? I’m even starting to understand a little about some of his

FYI here is the book: Eager to Love: The Alternative Way of Francis of Assisi

 

[Mystical_Seeker]

I am often amazed how people could claim to be contemplative but act explosively without any charity.

That’s one of the reasons I’m interested in true transformation, in favor of intellectual banter about it.

As far as “charity” if you are referring to me, then yeah maybe my pride IS the biggest one in the room, and if I caught you unaware I’m sorry. But this is a festering wound that has been going on a long time and finally I decided to quit being so timid about it. You might have been caught in the crossfire, but that’s how a lot of those who hate and/or fear Rohr, get started. So be careful where you step because these are rough waters and there is an amazing amount of material associated with Rohr that is at least as much disinformation as truth. Funny we have gay priests and we don’t have a problem with that. If Rohr is gay, as far as I know he has not come out.

The circle of life: apologists call mystics heretical. Mystics call apologists hypocrites. Life goes on, eh?

Also please note:

https://onecanhappen.files.wordpress.com/2014/05/wwjdwhip.jpg?w=540&h=386

So yeah that’s why I started a new thread. Might as well start poking holes in the baloon and start letting the pressure out. kpeople:

 

[underacloud]

Thank you for your kind explanation…it helps. Tho it almost seems that the definition of acquired would fit meditation.

May the Good Shepherd fill you with peace.

We could say that acquired contemplation sits between - and may cross over at times with - meditation and infused contemplation. It’s also true that some saints may use these terms a little differently, which can be confusing. The book I referred to earlier is very helpful - “the fulfilment of all desire”.

But the fundamental difference is that in meditation we use images, concepts, and our reasoning. Eg in saying the Rosary, we think of a particular mystery. Or praying before a crucifix or statue and using that image as our inspiration for prayer.

In contemplation - acquired or infused - we don not use images or our reasoning; we empty our mind of these things to focus on God Himself within us. We abandon all our previous images of Him and merely try to be with Him. It is the emptying and quietening of our minds that is so very difficult in this.

If we empty our mind of images and concepts of God, then what do we have left? This is essentially the question that the author of the Cloud is discussing (if not really answering). In this life, our understanding of God can never be as full as in the next life, and even for those who are proficient it is like knowing God through a thick cloud. That is the “cloud” part of the name. The “unknowing” part essentially refers to us putting aside all that we think we know about God, for it is a feeble and poor understanding.

 

[Michael_Mayo]

And the empying you speak of is often confused as Buddhist.

 

[DBT]

We could say that acquired contemplation sits between - and may cross over at times with - meditation and infused contemplation. It’s also true that some saints may use these terms a little differently, which can be confusing. The book I referred to earlier is very helpful - “the fulfilment of all desire”.

But the fundamental difference is that in meditation we use images, concepts, and our reasoning. Eg in saying the Rosary, we think of a particular mystery. Or praying before a crucifix or statue and using that image as our inspiration for prayer.

In contemplation - acquired or infused - we don not use images or our reasoning; we empty our mind of these things to focus on God Himself within us. We abandon all our previous images of Him and merely try to be with Him. It is the emptying and quietening of our minds that is so very difficult in this.

If we empty our mind of images and concepts of God, then what do we have left? This is essentially the question that the author of the Cloud is discussing (if not really answering). In this life, our understanding of God can never be as full as in the next life, and even for those who are proficient it is like knowing God through a thick cloud. That is the “cloud” part of the name. The “unknowing” part essentially refers to us putting aside all that we think we know about God, for it is a feeble and poor understanding.

That was a wonderful explanation … thank you!

For those not familiar, the author of The Cloud has a specific expression for this … naked intent. Here’s one example of how he uses it:
Privy Counseling:

When you go apart to be alone for prayer, put from your mind everything you have been doing or plan to do. Reject all thoughts, be they good or be they evil. Do not pray with words unless you are really drawn to this; or if you do pray with words, pay no attention to whether they are many or few. Do not weigh them or their meaning. Do not be concerned about what kind of prayers you use, for it is unimportant whether or not they are official liturgical prayers, psalms, hymns or anthems; whether they are for particular or general intentions; or whether you formulate them interiorly, by thoughts, or express them aloud in words. See that nothing remains in your conscious mind save a naked intent stretching out toward God.

When our prayer is acquired, the author recommends the “method” of monosyllabic prayer he describes in The Cloud … the use of a single, one syllable word to gather in our faculties in order to be more fully present to Christ. Attention and intention combined. The use of such an aspiration (“God” or “love” are examples he cites, though it can be anything we choose) pre-supposes much previous time spent in meditation where the meaning of such a word was pondered in depth. But now is not the time for such things … for the single word is to encapsulate our entire understanding. Our minds and hearts are now “full” from prior reflections and meditation … the “means” have now led us to the “ends.”

When our prayer is infused, we do not even need the use such a method … for God Himself places us in this state of naked intent. And such prayer can be very fluid just as you say. For example, one may be meditating on a mystery of the rosary and then feel drawn to the simplified acquired prayer just described. Perhaps the individual momentarily lays down the rosary to simply “be” with the Lord and “look” at Him. Perhaps, God willing, the prayer may proceed and deepen from there to the prayer states of quiet or even union that St. Teresa describes so well. All of this can happen within a single time of prayer … for the duration of the infused is typically brief. With the infused, we do not need to make an effort to slow down, simplify or silence the wanderings of our mind and heart … for that’s precisely what God does in us in this way of prayer. Loving attentiveness … not “doing” but “be-ing.”

Dave

 

[Mystical_Seeker]

We could say that acquired contemplation sits between - and may cross over at times with - meditation and infused contemplation. It’s also true that some saints may use these terms a little differently, which can be confusing. The book I referred to earlier is very helpful - “the fulfilment of all desire”.

But the fundamental difference is that in meditation we use images, concepts, and our reasoning. Eg in saying the Rosary, we think of a particular mystery. Or praying before a crucifix or statue and using that image as our inspiration for prayer.

In contemplation - acquired or infused - we don not use images or our reasoning; we empty our mind of these things to focus on God Himself within us. We abandon all our previous images of Him and merely try to be with Him. It is the emptying and quietening of our minds that is so very difficult in this.

If we empty our mind of images and concepts of God, then what do we have left? This is essentially the question that the author of the Cloud is discussing (if not really answering). In this life, our understanding of God can never be as full as in the next life, and even for those who are proficient it is like knowing God through a thick cloud. That is the “cloud” part of the name. The “unknowing” part essentially refers to us putting aside all that we think we know about God, for it is a feeble and poor understanding.

And the empying you speak of is often confused as Buddhist.

 

[underacloud]

And the empying you speak of is often confused as Buddhist.

Sometimes confused, but very different.

In Buddhism, emptying oneself is somewhat the goal in itself. Though a Buddhist could say a lot more.

But in Christian mysticism, one empties themself so to be filled with God. And more precisely, to know and be united with God who is already within us - we find Him in the inner mansions of our souls, as per St Teresa’s explanations.

Very different in the goal and the destination vs those of Buddhism.

 

[Robert_Sock]

Sometimes confused, but very different.

In Buddhism, emptying oneself is somewhat the goal in itself. Though a Buddhist could say a lot more.

But in Christian mysticism, one empties themself so to be filled with God. And more precisely, to know and be united with God who is already within us - we find Him in the inner mansions of our souls, as per St Teresa’s explanations.

Very different in the goal and the destination vs those of Buddhism.

Yes, we create a void (detachment from the world) that is to be filled by God.

 

[Mystical_Seeker]

Yes, we create a void (detachment from the world) that is to be filled by God.

Yes. That’s is a good, succinct way to describe it. The rest is about how to make that happen.

There is talking at God, talking to God, listening to God, and being with God – as the four stages of prayer the Armchair Mystic author (a Jesuit) talks about. Of those, contemplative prayer helps us with the last two – really can’t do that with a busy mind, and mouth.

Or if not mouth, a busy “phonological loop” as cognitive psychologists call it in a popular model of working memory – our little “inner voices” that think about stuff in a verbal way, the “episodic buffer” which thinks about events, and the “visuospatial sketchpad” that thinks about shapes and images. All of which interact with long term memory and recall, reprocess, and modify those memories. If I do that according to my willful or mindful thought, then I risk getting my limited mortal worldly ideas in the works, and it could limit access by the “inexpressible groanings” of the spirit. These are my “strong men” who must be silent for optimal entry by the Holy Spirit to plunder my house. I’ve heard it described that God is a “gentleman” in that He won’t come in uninvited. So it’s about receptivity; exemplified by the ‘yes’ of Mary to God.

At first, it was weird to willfully think about “nothing” – on purpose. So yeah, it was kind of a combination of relaxing and waiting, and eventually noticing and following the dynamics. This of course became thoughtful again yada yada for a while. Then I got to where I could quit thinking on purpose of images, and stories enough, but these things didn’t just stop it was trickier than that. But now and then I “accidentally” relaxed my mind and then it was like “hey for a few seconds I actually was not thinking of anything in particular.” Over time, it got to where it’s much easier to achieve that state and my hope is to have that receptivity, even while doing active things.

 

[cjforJesus]

It’s a shame to see a person being disturbed about contemplation because a famous writer who claims to be contemplative speaks against Church’s teaching. Contemplation is a pure form of prayer. It brings us closer to God. It should help us toward holiness. Advocacy of mortal sin has no place in this loving relationship with God.

My post was simply addressing to the concern of “cjfor jesus”. cj has a honest interest in contemplation and his distress should be answered. That is why I waited for long to see if anyone responded to his particular concern before I posted. I had no intention to attack anyone but simply answer cj’s legitimate concern.

Both Old and New Testaments are very clear about the grave sin of sodomy. None of the Saints, contemplative or not, had ever approved homosexuality. These are all non-deniable facts.

When we have the treasures of St. John of the Cross, St. Teresa of Avila, St. Therese, and Brother Lawrence for spiritual guidance, why bother to read any controversial writings that disturb our peace of mind? That is where I come from.

I do believe my concerns are legitimate because there could be many who present as “contemplatives” or “mystics” who have been deceived by the great Liar.

Another alleged contemplative group called Intercessors of the Lamb was suppressed by the Church for concerns among which were refusal to allow their finances to be analyzed.They had created a corporation to protect their many assets. A great many of the group obeyed the bishop and left the property when asked but the head refused and she and a few of the other nuns formed their own church. Were they ever true contemplatives? Disobedience to a legitimate superior is not a sign of unity.

The new age is full of these so called “mystics” who allegedly receive direct communication from God or angels. Their writings are often very complex and contrived with nothing clear cut but all relative to a mystical experience of light.

Another key new age concept you see in their writings is the eastern teaching of non dualism.This is just thinly veiled relativism.In this non dualistic thinking the goal is to become the “true self” whatever that is.This seems to imply there is also a “false self” which would be contradictory to its own belief.There is no self but YOU who constantly grows and learns.

Dissolving the ego is another goal of this non dualistic thinking. This supposed “ego” is portrayed as undesirable yet in reality is how you identify as “yourself” as distinct from others. Why would you want to eliminate that aspect of your God given will in favor of an immersion into some melting pot of indefinable “oneness?”

 

[DBT]

CJ -

What in the world are you trying to do here?

This is a thread about The Cloud of Unknowing!!!

And yet your contributions have nothing to do with this work or even contemplation in general … it’s just a bunch of mud flung against the wall in hopes that something will stick. A small sampling of your contributions …

-Buddhism
-Kundalini
-CP
-New Age
-Mind blanking
-only for monastics
-only the infused
-only for the highly educated
-only after every and all earthly desire has been renounced
-Fr Rohr

… and now the Intercessors of the Lamb???

Fine, The Cloud isn’t for you … so be it, nothing wrong with that at all. But why do you place so many obstacles, roadblocks and burdens at the feet of those who are drawn to such a work? What possible good do you think you’re doing?

Let the author of The Cloud speak in his own words to such trouble making:
Privy Counseling:

But one who does not dare abandon himself to God and criticizes others who do manifests an inner emptiness. For either the evil one has robbed his heart of the loving confidence he owes to God and the spirit of good will he owes to his fellow Christians, or else he is not yet sufficiently steeped in gentleness and truth to be a real contemplative himself.

 

[JimR-OCDS]

cjforJesus

Dissolving the ego is another goal of this non dualistic thinking. This supposed “ego” is portrayed as undesirable yet in reality is how you identify as “yourself” as distinct from others. Why would you want to eliminate that aspect of your God given will in favor of an immersion into some melting pot of indefinable “oneness?”

Actually ridding oneself of ego was taught by Archbishop Fulton Sheen.

The ego is what creates the false image of oneself and is contrary to the person God had in mind when he created you.

Also, St Francis believed that everything is connected to God and God is in everything.

Nothing exists without God. So, it is essentially a nondualistic belief.

Jesus himself said;

On that day you will realize that I am in my Father and you are in me and I in you. John 14:20

Jim

 

[Robert_Sock]

cjforJesus

Actually ridding oneself of ego was taught by Archbishop Fulton Sheen.

The ego is what creates the false image of oneself and is contrary to the person God had in mind when he created you.

Jim

Mortifying the self (including self-esteem) is also taught throughout The Imitation of Christ.

 

[cjforJesus]

cjforJesus

Actually ridding oneself of ego was taught by Archbishop Fulton Sheen.

The ego is what creates the false image of oneself and is contrary to the person God had in mind when he created you.

Also, St Francis believed that everything is connected to God and God is in everything.

Nothing exists without God. So, it is essentially a nondualistic belief.

Jesus himself said;

Jim

Actually it is selfishness that is undesirable and not the identification of self as distinct from others (Ego). We are all made in the image and likeness of God yet we are all individuals meant to know,love and serve God.

I believe Archbishop Sheen referred loosely to a “shadow self” which in essence is a person still consumed by earthly desires and selfishness.

Without ego there would be no great works of literature art or music as they are all ways of expressing the self as distinct from others.

 

[Michael_Mayo]

Sometimes confused, but very different.

In Buddhism, emptying oneself is somewhat the goal in itself. Though a Buddhist could say a lot more.

But in Christian mysticism, one empties themself so to be filled with God. And more precisely, to know and be united with God who is already within us - we find Him in the inner mansions of our souls, as per St Teresa’s explanations.

Very different in the goal and the destination vs those of Buddhism.

Yes, very different. Once they come to that emptiness…well, it is empty. Perhaps a Buddhist could explain the value in that. I think they might say something similar to being filled with “mu” or light or pure being. Something pretty abstract.

But we must decrease as He must increase.

 

[cjforJesus]

CJ -

What in the world are you trying to do here?

This is a thread about The Cloud of Unknowing!!!

And yet your contributions have nothing to do with this work or even contemplation in general … it’s just a bunch of mud flung against the wall in hopes that something will stick. A small sampling of your contributions …

-Buddhism
-Kundalini
-CP
-New Age
-Mind blanking
-only for monastics
-only the infused
-only for the highly educated
-only after every and all earthly desire has been renounced
-Fr Rohr

… and now the Intercessors of the Lamb???

Fine, The Cloud isn’t for you … so be it, nothing wrong with that at all. But why do you place so many obstacles, roadblocks and burdens at the feet of those who are drawn to such a work? What possible good do you think you’re doing?

Let the author of The Cloud speak in his own words to such trouble making:

The Intercessors of the Lamb was mentioned because they claim to be contemplatives. The title of the thread is “the cloud of unknowing and contemplative prayer”, I suppose there is no quantitative measurement for spiritual union though many have tried. God alone sees the heart.

As far as people wishing to read this piece of literature as well as any others I doubt my opinions would influence anyone here.

 

[DBT]

As far as people wishing to read this piece of literature as well as any others I doubt my opinions would influence anyone here.

The question remains: Why in the world do you post?

Distortions, errors, heresy’s, fallacies, erroneous concepts as you see them … your interpretation of which is, ironically, flawed in itself. This is the only thing you discuss as relates to contemplation. Never the actual truth or actual experience of it.

Extreme negativity for the sake of negativity, CJ …and you don’t think you have an influence? This is called stifling the Spirit.