MERTON An Introduction To Christian Mysticism

monastic wisdom series: number thirteen
Thomas Merton
An Introduction to
Christian Mysticism
Initiation into the Monastic Tradition 3
monastic wisdom series
Patrick Hart, ocso, General Editor
Advisory Board
Michael Casey, ocso Terrence Kardong, osb
Lawrence S. Cunningham Kathleen Norris
Bonnie Thurston Miriam Pollard, ocso
MW1 Cassian and the Fathers:

Initiation into the Monastic Tradition
Thomas Merton, ocso
MW2 Secret of the Heart: Spiritual Being
Jean-Marie Howe, ocso
MW3 Inside the Psalms: Reflections for Novices
Maureen F. McCabe, ocso
MW4 Thomas Merton: Prophet of Renewal
John Eudes Bamberger, ocso
MW5 Centered on Christ: A Guide to Monastic Profession
Augustine Roberts, ocso
MW6 Passing from Self to God: A Cistercian Retreat
Robert Thomas, ocso
MW7 Dom Gabriel Sortais:
An Amazing Abbot in Turbulent Times
Guy Oury, osb
MW8 A Monastic Vision for the 21st Century:
Where Do We Go from Here?
Patrick Hart, ocso, editor
MW9 Pre-Benedictine Monasticism:
Thomas Merton, ocso
MW10 Charles Dumont Monk-Poet: A Spiritual Biography
Elizabeth Connor, ocso
MW11 The Way of Humility
André Louf, ocso
MW12 Four Ways of Holiness for the Universal Church:
Drawn from the Monastic Tradition
Francis Kline, ocso
MW13 An Introduction to Christian Mysticism:
Thomas Merton, ocso
monastic wisdom series: number thirteen
An Introduction to
Christian Mysticism
by
Thomas Merton
Edited with an Introduction by

Patrick F. O’Connell
Preface by
Lawrence S. Cunningham
Cistercian Publications
Kalamazoo, Michigan
© The Merton Legacy Trust, 2008
All rights reserved
Cistercian Publications
Editorial Offices
The Institute of Cistercian Studies
Western Michigan University
Kalamazoo, Michigan 49008-5415
cistpub@wmich.edu
The work of Cistercian Publications is made possible in part by support from

Western Michigan University to The Institute of Cistercian Studies.
Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data
Merton, Thomas, 1915–1968.

An introduction to Christian mysticism : initiation into the monastic
tradition 3 / by Thomas Merton ; edited with an introduction by
Patrick F. O’Connell ; preface by Lawrence S. Cunningham.
p. cm. — (Monastic wisdom series ; no. 13)
Includes bibliographical references and index.
ISBN 978-0-87907-013-7
1. Mysticism. I. O’Connell, Patrick F. II. Title. III. Series.
BV5082.3.M47 2007
248.2'2—dc22 2007037374
Printed in the United States of America

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Preface vii
Introduction xi
An Introduction to Christian Mysticism 1
Appendix A: Textual Notes 349
Appendix B: For Further Reading 381
Acknowledgements 391
Index 393
PREFACE
In the 1949–1951 correspondence between the newly or-

dained Thomas Merton and his abbot, James Fox, later published
in The School of Charity, there is a discussion about the education
of young monks that is extraordinarily interesting. Merton felt
that the young men entering the monastery were being educated
for the priesthood but that there was no coherent program of
monastic formation. At a time when it was universally assumed
that choir monks would go on for the priesthood, the education
of these young monks was, of necessity, a course of studies laid
out by canon law as a prerequisite for ordination, with instruc-
tions in monasticism of necessity ancillary to that demand. It is
clear that Merton saw something fundamentally out of balance
with this arrangement but was unsure how to right the balance.
He recognized, as he noted in a letter to Dom James, that it was
difficult to see how one could superimpose a monastic curricu-
lum on top of the seminary curriculum. His solution, first as
master of scholastics and later as novice master, was to develop
a course of instructions for novices and the newly professed that
went under the generic name of “monastic orientations.”
The net result of Merton’s convictions was a whole series of
courses designed for novices or, in the case of this volume, a kind
of “post-graduate” seminar for newly ordained priests. Anyone
who has visited the Merton archives in Louisville can inspect the
vast pile of bound mimeographed volumes that give witness to
how seriously he took this task of monastic education. How
grateful we are that Patrick O’Connell has undertaken the ardu-
ous task of seeing some of these volumes to publication. O’Connell
vii
viii An Introduction to Christian Mysticism
has set a high standard with his editions of Merton’s novitiate

notes Cassian and the Fathers (2005) and Pre-Benedictine Monasti-
cism (2006), and we are now in his debt with An Introduction to
Christian Mysticism.
We might begin by noting that in the early 1960s a wide
survey of Christian mysticism was somewhat of a novelty. In the
standard seminary curriculum there was at least a one-semester
cruise through Adolphe Tanquerey’s scholastic manual on asceti-
cal theology. To complicate matters, both primary and secondary
sources were in short supply in English. Merton compiled these
notes nearly two decades before the first volume of the Paulist
Press “Classics of Western Spirituality” saw the light of day and
a generation before Bernard McGinn published the first volume
of his massive history of the subject. As O’Connell notes, Merton,
thanks to his linguistic skills, had to draw heavily on Franco-
phone sources and what little was available to him in Gethse-
mani’s library. Wisely, Merton drew on primary texts when he
had access to them and studiously avoided the swamp of neo-
scholastic debates that had been common in the earlier twentieth
century about the nature of, and distinction between, ascetical
and mystical theology.
For serious students of Merton’s work this present volume is
an estimable resource and that for at least two compelling reasons.
First, these notes, as it were, serve as a foundational level for grasp-
ing what stands behind such finished works as No Man Is an Island,
Thoughts in Solitude, New Seeds of Contemplation as well as many of
his essays on the spiritual life. That Merton wore his learning
lightly is, in fact, the case. Behind the limpid prose of his classical
works on the spiritual life, however, is a vast well of learning in
the sources. This volume is clearly an example of ressourcement
and as such tells us much about Merton’s intellectual and spiritual
development. That he was in intellectual dialogue when giving
this course with von Balthasar, Daniélou, and Leclercq, those mas-
ters of ressourcement, should come as no surprise.
Second, I think O’Connell makes a crucial point about Mer-
ton’s appropriation of an old trope in the Christian mystical
Preface ix
tradition. In a distinction as old as Origen’s prologue to his com-

mentary on the Song of Songs, spiritual writers have noted that
between the stage of purification (ethike) and the profound en-
counter with God (theologia) there is the human grasp of the pres-
ence of God in the created cosmos which was called theoria or
theoria physike. The later tradition would call that the stage of il-
lumination between purification and union but the point is, and
O’Connell correctly notes it, that an appreciation of theoria is a
crucial key to help explain what seems to be in Merton simply a
byproduct of his enormous curiosity: Zen calligraphy, Shaker
furniture, the abstract art of Ad Reinhardt, and so on. In fact, it
was a new way of “seeing” (theoria, at root, mean “gazing”) and
is part of the contemplative process. The value of theoria is, of
course, that it means that the penitential life is not an end in itself
but a preparation for a new way of seeing.
Merton never pursued this idea in any systematic fashion
but one can see in it a kind of a theology of culture broadly under-
stood. Not only did Merton see contemplative union open to
every baptized Christian but he strongly asserted that one can
cultivate the eye to see in a fresh new way. Not to put too fine a
point on it: if one hopes to grasp the mind of Thomas Merton
and not be satisfied with clichés and stereotypes then one must
take into account these profound academic exercises. They are a
key to his understanding of the contemplative life as, for example,
he describes it in the opening pages of New Seeds of Contempla-
tion.
Finally, a sympathetic reader of this volume needs to advert
to the word “introduction” in the title. After all, had Merton done
an in-depth study of Augustine or Bonaventure or Eckhart or the
great Carmelites this would not have been a book but a set of
books. One would better think of this work as a set of blaze marks
to work one’s way through the complex story of Christian mysti-
cism. One makes that journey with a deeply serious and widely
educated guide who is able to point out the salient landmarks of
the mystical tradition. “Guide” I think is the right word. Saint
John of the Cross never spoke of a spiritual director but frequently
An Introduction to Christian Mysticism
spoke of the spiritual guide (guia) and the spiritual teacher (mae-
stro espiritual) and in Merton one finds both.
In reading these pages I was struck how Merton attempted
to mend the long historical rift between systematic theology and
the contemplative theology normative in the Church before the
rise of scholasticism. He was not spinning out some variety of
spiritual gnosis but, rather, recalled to his students, and now,
gratefully, to us, the truth of one of Saint Thomas Aquinas’s most
profound observations, namely, that faith has as its final end not
what is articulated but the reality behind that articulation (non
ad enuntiabile sed ad rem).
Lawrence S. Cunningham
The University of Notre Dame
INTRODUCTION
The series of conferences that comprise An Introduction to

Christian Mysticism is unique among the courses taught by
Thomas Merton during his term as novice master at the Abbey
of Gethsemani (1955–1965) in that it was not intended for or
presented to the novices. On January 14, 1961, Merton had writ-
ten to Herbert Mason, “In March and April I have to teach eigh-
teen lectures in mystical theology in the new pastoral course for
our young priests, and this is keeping me busy.” By the time the
lectures actually started the number had expanded to twenty-two
(15), to be given twice a week, evidently, during March, April
and May. The course duly began on March 1 and continued
. Thomas Merton, Witness to Freedom: Letters in Times of Crisis, ed. William

H. Shannon (New York: Farrar, Straus, Giroux, 1994), 270.
. See Merton’s letter of March 9, 1961 to Robert Lax: “What makes me
most busy at the moment is twenty two lectures on mystical theology. This is
some of the vanity which God hath given men to be exercised therein” (Thomas
Merton and Robert Lax, When Prophecy Still Had a Voice: The Letters of Thomas
Merton & Robert Lax, ed. Arthur W. Biddle [Lexington: University Press of Ken-
tucky, 2001], 219). Two lists of preliminary outlines of the course each include
twenty-two classes: the earlier, in pencil, indicates the first eight classes as as-
signed to March, the next six to April, and the last eight to May; for transcrip-
tions of the two outlines, see Appendix A, pages 349–50 (the later outline, in
pen), and 351 (the earlier, in pencil).
. See Merton’s journal entry for March 3, 1961: “I started the mystical
theology class Wednesday (Mar. 1)” (Thomas Merton, Turning Toward the World:
The Pivotal Years. Journals, vol. 4: 1960–1963, ed. Victor A. Kramer [San Francisco:
HarperCollins, 1996], 97).
xi
xii An Introduction to Christian Mysticism
through May 19, when Merton noted in his journal, “Finished

the official mystical theology course today. Some extra classes to
be fitted in where I can.” In fact, however, these extra classes
continued at least throughout the summer. The Foreword to the
mimeographed text of the course notes is dated “Vigil of the As-
sumption, 1961” (i.e., August 14) (4), but the classes continued
at least into the following month. On September 9, Merton wrote
to Etta Gullick, “I had a mystical theology course which is getting
prolonged by a ‘popular demand’ which I suspect to be ninety
percent nonsense and ten percent pure illusion. And it requires
a lot of preparation.” The day before, he had noted in his journal,
“So I teach and teach, not only novices. This mystical theology
class drags on and on. The young priests now want some sort of
seminar, and I think it is foolish, a waste of time, yet to please
them and soothe my guilt feelings—and perhaps to satisfy my
vanity—I suppose I will do it. I wish I could call it love.” There
is no further mention in journal or letters of the mystical theology
course, nor are there any subsequent references to a seminar for
. Omitting two classes during Holy Week (March 26–April 1), this would
have been the twenty-second class if the course met twice per week.
. Turning Toward the World, 120; Merton writes of “still slugging {slog-
ging?} along with mystical theology” in a letter of May 10 to Sr. Thérèse Lent-
foehr (Thomas Merton, The Road to Joy: Letters to New and Old Friends, ed. Robert
E. Daggy [New York: Farrar, Straus, Giroux, 1989], 238), but three days later he
writes to Abdul Aziz, “I have been taken up with more numerous classes for
the last three months, but this is now ending. I will send you the notes of these
classes in mystical theology when they are ready” (Thomas Merton, The Hidden
Ground of Love: Letters on Religious Experience and Social Concerns, ed. William H.
Shannon [New York: Farrar, Straus, Giroux, 1985], 48), and on the same day he
writes to Mark Van Doren, “For three months I have been pounding away at a
mad course in mystical theology and have enjoyed the sweating, but it is finally
ending and I enjoy that more. It is always racking to talk about what should
not be said” (Road to Joy, 41). On the last day of the official course, he tells John
Wu, “I have been busy finishing up my course in mystical theology and various
other tasks” (Hidden Ground of Love, 616).
. Hidden Ground of Love, 353.
. Turning Toward the World, 160.
Introduction xiii
the young priests, but circumstantial evidence suggests that Mer-

ton did continue to meet with the group for some considerable
time subsequent to this entry.
While he sounded rather tired of the conferences by this
point, he had earlier expressed satisfaction that they were speak-
ing to an authentic desire among the monks attending the course
for a deepened awareness of the contemplative dimension of
their lives. On March 24, he reflected in his journal on a session
held in the new cinderblock cottage that would become his
hermitage:
Wednesday afternoon (rain). The Pastoral Theology group

and others came to St. Mary of Carmel—conference on the
Spiritual Senses and general discussion. A very happy at-
mosphere and I think everything was profitable—a kind
of opening up. Have never had so much of a sense of the
need and the hunger of the priests in the monastery for
mysticism and contemplation—in a very simple way. It is
true that a large part of our difficulties comes from frustra-
tion of this deep need and a kind of inarticulate temptation
to despair that takes refuge in activities without too much
sense.
As he points out in his Foreword, while the “approach has been

mainly historical and positive in an attempt to recover some of
the rich thought of the patristic and medieval periods” (3), his
purpose was less strictly academic than formational,
an effort to broaden the horizons and deepen the perspec-

tives of mystical theology in a monastic setting. . . . The
lectures were intended primarily for monastic priests in
a course of “pastoral” theology—that is to say for monks
who sought background and contact with sources that
would enable them to be of benefit to their brethren in
spiritual direction or in that sapientiae doctrina which St.
Benedict looks for in superiors (3).
. Turning Toward the World, 102.

xiv An Introduction to Christian Mysticism
They reflect Merton’s core belief, the foundation as well of his

numerous published books on contemplation, that “the Christian
mystical tradition is something that has been handed down not
only to be talked about but to be lived” (4).
Merton’s original outlines for the course present an ambi-
tious overview of the mystical tradition that in the event he was
not able to carry out fully. The subtitle of the course, “(From the
Apostolic Fathers to the Council of Trent),” represents a consider-
able scaling back of the chronological breadth initially proposed:
in the earliest outline, the twelfth class, the beginning of the sec-
ond half of the course, is labeled “Post Trent—Jesuits—St The-
resa.” (351)! It is followed by: “St John of the Cross” [13]; “Dark
Night” [14]; “Later Carmelites—mod. Debates” [15]; “Semi Quiet-
ists etc” [16]; “Modern Writers—Saudreau Poulain” [17]; “Non-
Xtian mysticism?” [18]; “Hallaj—Sufis” [19] (n. 20 is left blank,
presumably for a second class on this topic); “Byzantine Mysti-
cism” [21]; “St Gregory Palamas” [22]. The semi-Quietists and
modern writers were already cancelled on this first outline to
make room for two additional classes on “Franciscans—Rhenish
Mystics” and “Complete Separation of Myst + Theol” (the latter
itself subsequently cancelled) to precede the “Post Trent” class.
By the time Merton put together his second outline (349–50) the
Jesuits and St. Teresa had moved all the way to class 19 (which
was then switched to 20), followed only by “St John Cross Dark
Night” (originally 18-19, then 20-21, and finally just 21); “Later
Carmelites” (subsequently added to the Jesuits and Teresa class);
and “Byz. Myst. Conclusion” (originally two classes reduced to
one). In the actual text, however, the Byzantines have disap-
peared along with the non-Christians. In fact in his Foreword
Merton writes, “It has not been possible to carry out our original
intention to discuss St. John of the Cross and the Byzantine mysti-
cal tradition” (3), though in the final text John of the Cross does
. In his January 14 letter to Herbert Mason, Merton had written, “I want

to bring in Hallaj and maybe other Oriental mystics if I have elbowroom” (Wit-
ness to Freedom, 270).
Introduction xv
receive extensive discussion, in a context that reflects a consider-

able reorientation found in what were evidently the “extra
classes” added after the formal conclusion of the course, and
more specifically those which were subsequent to the writing of
these prefatory remarks in mid-August.10
Merton’s plans for what was initially to be the first half of
the course remain quite consistent in topics, if not in number of
classes, in the two outlines, and are followed closely in the actual
text of the conferences. After a pair of introductory classes, the
topics include: St. John’s Gospel, Martyrs, Gnostics, Divinization,
Christological Controversies, the meaning of the term “mysti-
cism,” Gregory of Nyssa, the spiritual senses, Evagrius, Pseudo-
Dionysius, “Western Mysticism,” the Dionysian tradition in the
West, the Franciscans, the Rhenish mystics, Quietism, and the
separation of mysticism and theology. Except for the last two,
which are treated only in passing, this list accurately represents
the actual development of the course as found in the written
notes. The only significant differences between the two versions
of the outline for these sections of the course are the omission of
mention of Pseudo-Macarius in the second version,11 and the
addition of “Theoria Phys[ike],” which becomes an extremely
important section of the course as finally written.
The only topic that receives major attention in this part of
the course that is not specifically mentioned in the outlines is
Béguine spirituality, which is discussed in some detail under the
general heading of “Fourteenth-Century Mysticism” (“The 14th–
15th Cents.” in a secondary, marginal list on the second outline).
10. Merton notes in his journal that he is “writing up mystical theology

notes” on August 11 (Turning Toward the World, 150).
11. Merton included a section on Pseudo-Macarius in the “Prologue to Cas
sian” section of his novitiate course on Cassian and his predecessors (Thomas
Merton, Cassian and the Fathers: Initiation into the Monastic Tradition, ed. Patrick F.
O’Connell, Monastic Wisdom [MW], vol. 1 [Kalamazoo, MI: Cistercian Publica-
tions, 2005], 81–88), which may have prompted him to omit discussion of this
author here, as was the case with Origen (see below, xxi)—though not of Gregory
of Nyssa or of Evagrius.
xvi An Introduction to Christian Mysticism
However, following the section on St. Teresa, the entire rest of

the text of the course consists in material not included at all in
the projected outlines of the course, namely a lengthy section on
“The Spiritual Direction of Contemplatives” followed by a second
section on the same topic, subtitled “Direction in the Crises of
the Mystical Life” (along with two appendices to be considered
later). These sections, which comprise 44 pages of a total of 170
in the mimeographed version of the text proper, evidently owe
their existence to the continuation of the course beyond its in-
tended limit of twenty-two classes, and to another project on
which Merton was engaged during the period of the “extra
classes” of the summer and early fall of 1961.
From indications in Merton’s journal and letters, it is pos-
sible to get some sense of the progression of classes: during March
he appears to be keeping to his schedule, or perhaps even slightly
ahead, as he is discussing the topic of the spiritual senses (class
8 on the outlines) at the hermitage during what appears to be his
seventh class.12 But the pace apparently slows subsequently, since
in his May 13 letter to Mark Van Doren, less than a week before
the formal end of the class, he writes, “I ended up last time Be-
guines, beguines and beguines. They were wonderful, like the
quails around my house. Everybody has forgotten them, but they
were very wise and Eckhart learned all the best things he knew
from them.”13 In the two remaining “regular” classes he could
hardly have progressed beyond the Rhineland mystics, Eckhart
and Tauler, and in fact his frequent mentions of Eckhart in letters
12. If the classes were held on the same days each week, as seems likely,
they were given on Wednesdays (the day on which the first class was held—
March 1) and Fridays (the day of the final class—May 19); the entry for March
24 is unclear, since it begins “Wednesday afternoon” but that day was a Friday;
presumably he was referring to a class that met two days previous, which would
have been the seventh class; if he was mistaken about the day and was actually
referring to a class that met on that day, it would have been the eighth class.
13. Road to Joy, 41; see also his journal entry from the beginning of that
week, Sunday, May 7, in which he writes about reading Dom Porion’s book on
Hadewijch, his major source for the Béguines (Turning Toward the World, 117).
Introduction xvii
and journal entries of June and July suggest that he may well
have continued to discuss these fourteenth-century Germans
after the completion of the course proper.14 Certainly the material
on St. Teresa must have been discussed during these extra sum-
mer classes, followed by the additional, new topic of spiritual
direction (unless this was the subject of the “seminar” that the
priests had requested and was thus presented through the fall).
The reason for this unexpected change in focus is explained
in letters and journal entries from the summer. In a June 21 letter
to Mark Van Doren, he remarks, “I am not writing much at the
moment and not intending to write much except for doing chores
like an Encyclopedia article (New Catholic Encyclopedia, which
will probably be stuffy).”15 He elaborates on the “chore” in a
journal entry for June 29: “New Cath. Encycl. has repeated its re-
quest for one article. I am convinced they do it very unwillingly,
merely to get my name on their list. I refused before a ludicrous
request to do 300 words on Dom Edmond Obrecht (!!) and now
they have asked for 5,000 on spiritual direction and I feel utterly
foul for having accepted.”16 There is no further mention of the
article until a September 19 letter to Sr. Thérèse Lentfoehr,17 and
then in his journal five days later he writes, “Have to finish article
for Catholic Encyclopedia,”18 which he calls a “tiresome task” in a
letter of the same day to Dona Luisa Coomaraswamy.19 Finally
14. See his letters to Etta Gullick of June 10 and July 1 (Hidden Ground of
Love, 342, 343) and the journal entry of July 4 (Turning Toward the World, 137).
15. Road to Joy, 42.
16. Turning Toward the World, 135.
17. “I have had to write a few articles for a new Catholic Youth Encyclopedia
which, between you and me and the gatepost, sounds rather useless. But maybe
they had a method in their madness, and decided to do something that would
have more life in it than the New Catholic Encyclopedia. I have a long article to do
for them, too, on ‘Spiritual Direction’” (Road to Joy, 239); his articles on “Con-
templation” and “Perfection, Christian,” appeared in The Catholic Encyclopedia
for School and Home, 12 vols. (New York: McGraw-Hill, 1965), 3.228-30, 8.328-32.
19. Hidden Ground of Love, 133.
xviii An Introduction to Christian Mysticism
on October 10 he writes in his journal, “The other day I finally

finished the article ‘Direction, Spiritual’ for the New Catholic En-
cyclopedia. I should have finished it in August (Deadline Nov. 1,
but I wanted to get it done in August).”20 Work on this article
(which ironically ended up not being accepted for publication in
the New Catholic Encyclopedia21) coincided with the concluding
phase of the mystical theology course, and prompted Merton
either to include a section on spiritual direction at the end of the
course itself, or perhaps to make it the subject of the “seminar”
requested by his students, if such a continuation of these confer-
ences did indeed take place. The latter supposition is perhaps
more likely, as there is no hint of inclusion of this material in the
Foreword to the notes, written in mid-August, and in fact it is
clear that at that time Merton had no idea that he would include
a substantial section on John of the Cross in the second, “spiritual
crises” section of the direction material. Given the fact that not
quite four weeks separates the writing of the Foreword from the
journal entry mentioning the request for the “seminar,” the rather
abrupt shift in focus, and the quite detailed elaboration of the
spiritual direction material, it is at least plausible that this topic
became the focus of a somewhat distinct set of conferences, which
also allowed Merton to incorporate material from John of the
Cross (some of which is related only tangentially to spiritual di-
rection), and which were still related closely enough to the mysti-
cal theology material proper to allow them to be included as the
two final sections of the written notes.
As for the material in the appendices, Merton’s only refer-
ence to the first comes in a journal entry for December 14, 1961,
where he notes that he is reading the Scala Claustralium “for the
novices,”22 an indication that he was intending to use it in regular
novitiate conferences and that it was incorporated into the mysti-

21. The article has now been published in The Merton Seasonal, 32.1 (Spring
2007), 3–17.
Introduction xix
cal theology notes because of the relevance of the material rather

than because he had or was intending to discuss it with the group
of young priests to whom the course had been given. The second
appendix, on Robert Jay Lifton’s book on brainwashing, is related
somewhat tenuously to the spiritual direction material and in
fact was initially headed “Appendix—to Spiritual Direction” in
Merton’s original notes,23 and presumably was added to the notes
even later than the Scala material, perhaps even in early 1962;24
it seems unlikely that it was ever discussed with the “seminar,”
which presumably had stopped meeting by that time, since it is
probable that some further mention of the group would appear
in the journal if it continued to meet on a long-term basis. In any
case, by March 1962, the mimeographed notes on mystical the-
ology had been printed up and not only distributed to those who
had been in the course but sent to various interested parties be-
yond the confines of the monastery, since in a March letter to Sr.
M. Madeleva, president of St. Mary’s College at Notre Dame,
Merton mentions having already sent them to her.25
23. Merton subsequently crossed out “to Spiritual Direction” and inter-
lined “II” after “Appendix”.
24. A discussion of “brainwashing” in a January 25, 1962 letter to Victor
Hammer is clearly dependent on the Lifton book, and suggests that Merton had
read it recently and it was fresh in his mind: “As for brainwashing, the term is
used very loosely about almost anything. Strict technical brainwashing is an ar-
tificially induced ‘conversion,’ brought about by completely isolating a person
emotionally and spiritually, undermining his whole sense of identity, and then
‘rescuing’ him from this state of near-collapse by drawing him over into a new
sense of community with his persecutors, now his rescuers, who ‘restore’ his
identity by admitting [him] into their midst as an approved and docile instru-
ment. Henceforth he does what they want him to do and likes it, indeed finds
a certain satisfaction in this, and even regards his old life as shameful and infe-
rior” (Witness to Freedom, 6).
25. Witness to Freedom, 43; she was writing to inquire why the English
mystics, specifically Julian of Norwich, had not been included in the notes (see
below, pages xxi, xlix–l); Merton had evidently sent the notes in connection with
his role as advisor to St. Mary’s faculty who were in the process of setting up a
xx An Introduction to Christian Mysticism
*******
Because Merton’s various courses with the novices were
open-ended and he had complete control of the schedule, he was
able to develop those sets of conferences according to his own
designs. The situation with An Introduction to Christian Mysticism
was quite different: the limited number of classes (at least as
originally projected), as well as the broad chronological sweep
of the material, imposed certain limitations both on the content
and on Merton’s ways of dealing with his material. He realized
from the start that his survey could not be completely compre-
hensive, given the time constraints. An initial principle of selec-
tion was to focus on the mystical dimension of Christian
spirituality, while recognizing the continuum between ascetical
and mystical aspects:
If this “course” is restricted to twenty-two lectures in the

Pastoral year, it is obviously taken for granted that much
else has been said and taught and assimilated, especially
in ascetic theology, before we come to this short series of
lectures. Ascetic theology is prescribed in the novitiate. {It
presents the} fundamentals of monastic life. The Master
of Students should continue the ascetic formation of the
young professed monk, deepening his monastic life and,
especially, orienting his life of studies and his spiritual
growth toward the monastic priesthood. There are retreats,
constant sermons and conferences, reading. There is indi-
vidual direction {and} constant “exercise” in the ascetic
life. Hence for all the years of the monastic life through
which the student has now passed, he has been subjected
intensively to ascetic formation and has at least gathered
some smattering of knowledge about mystical theology.
Hence the purpose of these lectures is not to cover every
detail and aspect of the subject, but to look over the whole
field, to coordinate and deepen the ascetic knowledge that it
program in Christian Culture there: see his December 13, 1961 letter to Bruno
Schlesinger, a faculty member at the college (Hidden Ground of Love, 541–43).
Introduction xxi
is presumed everybody has, and to orient that asceticism

to the mystical life. (15)
Though the heading “Ascetical and Mystical Theol-

ogy” is found in the typescript on the first page of the text
proper and is sometimes used to refer to these conferences,26 the
title used on the preceding handwritten page that includes the
Foreword is the more accurate “An Introduction to Christian
Mysticism,” which is therefore used as the title for this
volume.
A second principle was to omit certain topics that had been
discussed by Merton in novitiate courses and were available in
mimeographed form:27 thus he mentions that despite their im-
portance to the subject he will not be looking in detail at St. Paul’s
mystical teaching (40), or at Origen (52), or at the Cistercians (18),
because they had been discussed in other courses, though refer-
ences to all of them, particularly the Cistercians, are brought in
at appropriate places. Certain other figures that would certainly
merit inclusion, such as Jan Ruysbroeck and the English mystics
of the fourteenth century, do not appear; they were perhaps origi-
nally intended to be included under the heading of “The 14th-
15th cents.” but were omitted because of time constraints. Merton
writes to Sr. Madeleva, who inquired about the absence of the
latter group, “The chief reason why Julian of Norwich and the
other English mystics are not in the notes I sent is that I did not
have time to treat them adequately, and in proportion to my love
for them,”28 though it should be noted that this love actually was
26. See for example Victor A. Kramer, “Patterns in Thomas Merton’s Intro-
duction to Ascetical and Mystical Theology,” Cistercian Studies, 24 (1989), 338–
54; this is the title given in the Table of Contents in the “Collected Essays” and it
has been pasted in on the title page of some copies of the bound mimeograph.
27. This is not always the case, however: both Gregory of Nyssa and
Evagrius had been discussed in detail in Merton’s conferences on Cassian and
his predecessors but reappear here: see Cassian and the Fathers, 52–60, 88–96.
28. Witness to Freedom, 43 [March, 1962].
xxii An Introduction to Christian Mysticism
developing during the period when Merton was teaching the

Mystical Theology course, as will be seen below.
The other major difference between this set of notes and
those of Merton’s novitiate courses is the relative absence of ex-
tended discussions of primary texts. Aside from the Appendix
on the Scala Claustralium, not originally prepared for these confer-
ences, only discussions of the De Oratione (and to a lesser extent
the Kephalaia Gnostica) of Evagrius, the poems of Hadewijch, and
the writings of Teresa of Avila and of John of the Cross are based
mainly on primary source materials. Merton’s survey relies heav-
ily, as he himself points out, on secondary sources, especially
those currently available only in French, such as the Dictionnaire
de Spiritualité, the first two volumes of the Histoire de Spiritualité
Chrétienne, and books such as Jean Daniélou’s Platonisme et Théolo-
gie Mystique (on Gregory of Nyssa) and Hans Urs von Balthasar’s
Liturgie Cosmique (on Maximus the Confessor), easily accessible
for the bilingual Merton. But it should be noted that generally
Merton does not simply follow a single source in his own discus-
sion of a particular topic or figure. For example in the section on
divinization he uses ten different sources, and in his treatment
of Meister Eckhart he incorporates material from nine different
sources. As a rule, whether he is drawing on multiple sources or
relying on one major source, for example the introduction to a
French translation of John Tauler’s sermons in his section on the
fourteenth-century German preacher and mystic, he mainly uses
secondary material as a quarry for quotations from the mystics
themselves, so that his notes are filled with passages from the
figures he is discussing even if few particular texts are discussed
in extenso. Given the nature of the course, this strategy is both
appropriate and effective.
*******
This reliance on secondary sources should not be taken as
an indication that Merton does not highlight key themes of his
own in these conferences. One such theme emphasized from the
Introduction xxiii
very outset is the intrinsic relationship between mysticism and

doctrine. He notes in his introductory remarks that
the great mystical tradition . . . is not separated from the

dogmatic and moral tradition but forms one whole with it.
Without mysticism there is no real theology, and without
theology there is no real mysticism. Hence the emphasis
will be on mysticism as theology, to bring out clearly the
mystical dimensions of our theology, hence to help us to
do what we must really do: live our theology. Some think it
is sufficient to come to the monastery to live the Rule. More
is required—we must live our theology, fully, deeply, in its
totality. Without this, there is no sanctity. The separation of
theology from “spirituality” is a disaster. (15–16)
While he is critical of a sterile intellectual approach to the Chris-

tian life, theology as “a mere product of erudition” in the words
of the Orthodox theologian Georges Florovsky (37), he warns
against a perspective that would treat theology as “a penance
and effort without value, except as a chore to be offered up,
whereas spirituality is to be studied, developed, experienced.”
Merton contends that this devaluation of the doctrinal content
of the Christian mystery leads to “experience of experience and
not experience of revelation and of God revealing,” which is “the
death of contemplation” (36). He endorses von Balthasar’s evalu-
ation of the Patristic era as an age when “personal experience
and dogmatic faith were a living unity” and agrees that
“[m]ysticism and experience” must be recognized as “a servant
of revelation, of the Word, of the Church—not an evasion from
service” (36). He finds in the Gospel of John the model of this
integration of the doctrinal and the experiential dimensions: “It
is a theology; it is mysticism—{there is} no separation between
the two; both are one in our life in Christ” (38).
Thus union with God is recognized to be profoundly Trini-
tarian, a process in which the gift of the Spirit unites the believer
to the Son, in whom one is united to the Father, as St. Irenaeus
declares: “those who have in themselves the Spirit of God are
xxiv An Introduction to Christian Mysticism
brought to the Logos, the Son, Who takes them and offers them
to the Father. From the Father they receive incorruptibility” (51).
Merton finds the same idea in Clement of Alexandria: “Through
the Scriptures we are drawn by the Spirit to the Father, through
the Son” (54). Likewise Merton points to the “Incarnation [as] the
center of Christian mysticism” (38). The consistent Patristic teach-
ing is that the union of the Word with humanity in the person of
Jesus makes possible participation in divine life, both in this life
and in eternity:
The mysticism and the dogmatic theology of the Church are

inseparably united in Athanasius, to such a point that they
stand and fall together by the single argument of man’s
divinization by the Incarnation of Christ. . . . Diviniza-
tion is the result of the Incarnation; more, it is the very
purpose of the Incarnation. . . . St. Athanasius sums up his
whole doctrine: He became man in order that we might
become God. He made Himself visible in His body in
order that we might have an idea of the invisible
Father. He underwent outrages from men in order
that we might have part in immortality (De Incarn. 54).
This gives the complete picture. St. Athanasius is not
explicitly concerned with what we would call mystical
experience, but his doctrine is the theological foundation
for all such experience. (60, 62)
Soteriology is presented as equally central to any authentically

Christian experience and interpretation of mystical union. It is
only through dying to the alienated, sinful self and rising to new
life with and in the resurrected Christ that one shares in the di-
vine life of Trinitarian love. Asceticism is initially identified,
based on Mark 8:34, with taking up one’s cross (19) through self-
denial and following Christ, and is linked to martyrdom as a
participation in Christ’s death and resurrection that in Ignatius
of Antioch becomes an early articulation of mystical union (43).
But the paschal journey is not restricted to the literal surrender
of life in physical martyrdom: this pattern must be reproduced
in any authentic Christian spiritual life. As Merton summarizes,
Introduction xxv
what the martyr undergoes physically every Christian must

undergo spiritually:
The tradition of the martyrs makes it clear that to attain

to perfect union with God, a “death” of the self is neces-
sary. . . . How does one die to self? The martyr’s case
is unambiguous. His exterior, bodily self is destroyed in
a real death, and his inner self lives in Christ, raised up
with Christ. . . . The ascetic and mystical death to self
must in some sense reproduce what is most essential in
the martyr’s death. Actual dissolution of the union of body
and soul is not of the “essence” of this death of the self,
but complete liberation from bodily desires seems to be
so. . . . We must bear in mind the question of the “death
of the self” as we proceed in this course. It will be inter-
preted variously down the ages (v.g. the mystic death in
the Dark Night of St. John {of the} Cross, the stigmatization
of St. Francis, etc.) (48)
Merton finds this same focus to be central as well in his own

Cistercian tradition:
We see in Bernard the full mystical explicitation of what

is contained and already quite explicit in the Fathers. Ob-
serve how the idea of death to ourselves in order to live in
Christ is expressed here. It is a mystical transposition of
the literal death we saw in the great martyr-theologians.
{Note the} classical expressions—the drop of water in the
barrel of wine, etc. Note the nature of this “death”: it is
“death by absorption into a higher life”—death brought about
by a life—the end of one life by being lifted into a higher
life of a more exalted nature. (64)
Thus in Merton’s view the mystical and the doctrinal are in-
separable. Christian life must be the actualization of the saving
mysteries that are professed in faith and celebrated in the liturgy
and sacraments. He cites with approval Vladimir Lossky’s assertion
that defense of dogma is at the same time a defense of the authentic
possibilities for sharing the divine life. He summarizes:
xxvi An Introduction to Christian Mysticism
By “mysticism” we can mean the personal experience of

what is revealed to all and realized in all in the mystery of
Christ. And by “theology” we mean the common revela-
tion of the mystery which is to be lived by all. The two be-
long together. There is no theology without mysticism (for
it would have no relation to the real life of God in us) and
there is no mysticism without theology (because it would
be at the mercy of individual and subjective fantasy). . . .
Mysticism and theology have one and the same end—they
culminate in theosis or the fullness of the divine life in the
souls of the faithful. (65–66)
The loss of this interpenetration of doctrine and experience in

the West during the late Middle Ages is for Merton one of the
main reasons for the eclipse of the contemplative life in the cen-
turies since the Reformation, and its recovery is one of the im-
peratives of the renewal of contemporary Christian life, a recovery
that Merton sees as being assisted immeasurably by a revived
awareness of the Eastern Christian tradition, both in the Patristic
era and later, for the East largely was able to avoid the split be-
tween doctrine and life that developed in the West with the rise
of the more objective, “scientific” theology of the schools and the
concomitant separation of knowledge and love among the “af-
fective Dionysians” following the lead of Thomas Gallus, along
with the general tendency toward anti-intellectualism that pre-
dominated among spiritual writers from the late Middle Ages
down to modern times; Merton much preferred the idea main-
tained in his own Cistercian tradition, that love was itself a way
of knowing (“Amor ipse notitia est” [84]) to any sharp dichotomiz-
ing of knowledge and love. Though he made no pretensions to
being a systematic theologian himself, Merton makes clear in
these lectures that he considers solid systematic theology neither
a threat nor a distraction to contemplation, but its vitally neces-
sary foundation.
At the same time, however, Merton is just as clear that nei-
ther theology nor mysticism can be reduced to a neat, tidy col-
lection of precise, logically articulated concepts. Hence the central
Introduction xxvii
importance of the via negativa, the apophatic dimension, in these

notes as in Merton’s work as a whole. The Christian life culmi-
nates in an encounter with the divine mystery that infinitely
transcends words, images and ideas. Hence the importance of
the teaching of Gregory of Nyssa, Pseudo-Dionysius, Meister
Eckhart, John of the Cross and other teachers of the negative way
in these pages, and hence also the critique of Dom Cuthbert
Butler’s thesis of a tradition of “Western Mysticism” that is basi-
cally cataphatic and untouched by the Dionysian emphasis on
the luminous darkness in which God must be encountered (168–
70), as well as the hint of impatience evident in his discussions
of the plethora of labels for degrees of spiritual attainment among
later commentators on Teresa of Avila (241). Early in his introduc-
tory remarks, Merton states that “the apophatic (dark) tradition
. . . is equally important in the East and in the West” (17), and
shortly afterwards he expands on this observation in relation to
the position of Butler:
He stresses the special character of Western mysticism as a

mysticism of light, as opposed to Eastern mysticism as a mys-
ticism of “night,” and he concludes that the genuine West-
ern mystical tradition is represented by pre-Dionysian au-
thors: Augustine, Gregory, and Bernard. The later Western
mystics, influenced by the introduction of the writings of
Pseudo-Dionysius into the West, are, he says, not true to
the Western tradition. (This is aimed especially at St. John
of the Cross, but also people like Tauler, Ruysbroeck, etc.)
He observes, “This distinction is important and we shall see that

it comes close to the heart of the matter in these conferences of
ours” (30–31). While he perhaps overstresses the polemical nature
of Butler’s approach (the abbot draws liberally on John of the
Cross and even cites Pseudo-Dionysius in his opening descrip-
tions of mysticism as well as in the “afterthoughts” that are in-
cluded in the second edition of his book), Merton does raise valid
questions, both historical and theological, about any approach
to mysticism that would exclude or subordinate the way of
xxviii An Introduction to Christian Mysticism
“unknowing” in contemplative experience. In writing of Gregory

of Nyssa, he points out that the emphasis on the divine darkness
in his writings is both doctrinal and experiential: it is a refutation
of the radical Arian (Anomoean) contention of Eunomius and
Aetius that the being of God is intellectually comprehensible (and
so incompatible with orthodox Trinitarian dogma) (76–77), and
is a description of “an existential contact and communion with
the very being of God, which remains unknowable in all its full-
ness,” a darkness that is not mere agnosticism but a recognition,
an experience, of the infinite reality of God that is therefore “a
positive reality and a light” and thus “more true than any determi-
nate conceptual knowledge of God” (79). Likewise the teaching
of the Mystical Theology of Pseudo-Dionysius is not the opposite
of the cataphatic approach found in the author’s other works but
its completion. “The originality of his theology is also contingent
upon its unity. The Mystical Theology must not be separated from
all the rest of his works. . . . It presupposes all the other Diony-
sian writings. It presupposes the theology of light and darkness
in the Hierarchies and the Divine Names. It presupposes a strong
emphasis on symbolic and sacramental theology” (137). Merton at-
tributes the fissure between scholastic and spiritual theology not
to the “invasion” of Dionysian thought into the West but to an
artificial separation of the Mystical Theology from the rest of the
Dionysian corpus: “It is quite likely that the writers of the late
Middle Ages who, following Denys, broke away from scholastic
theology to become professional ‘mystical theologians’ made this
mistake to a great extent” (137). The Mystical Theology teaches not
just a denial of the adequacy of all conceptual articulations of the
divine attributes, but the need to transcend even the very catego-
ries of positive and negative theology, which are themselves con-
ceptual expressions that circumscribe the infinite reality of God.
Mystical theology is not talk about God, it is encountering a God
who cannot be conceptualized; it is, Merton writes,
beyond both forms of discursive theology, cataphatic and

apophatic. It is the fulfillment of both and their jus-
Introduction xxix
tification for existing. It is a transcendent and experi-

enced theology beyond symbols and discourse. It is not
relative (apophatic theology is in relation to the cataphatic
which it completes and corrects). Mystical theology stands
in relation to no other theology. {It} is a pure immaterial
vision beyond intelligence, beyond reflection and self-cor-
rection. It is beyond the division of intelligence and will:
hence it is not to be called primarily a matter of intelligence
or primarily a matter of love: the followers of Dionysius in
the West emphasize it as an act of will and thus tend to di-
minish it. {It is} passive, beyond activity, {at} the summit of
the spirit, invaded and possessed by ecstatic love directly
given by God, a pure grace, pure love, {which} contacts
God in ecstasy. Ecstasy {is} a complete break with sense,
with intelligence and with the self. Here Dionysius goes
beyond Gregory and Evagrius: {it is} outside the intelli-
gence, the will, all created beings and the self. This is the
important contribution of Dionysius—the full meaning of
ecstasy, not just a going out from all things other than the
self, but out of the self also. (142–43)
But Merton is also convinced that the tendency on the part

of some spiritual theologians to deemphasize or to skip over
completely the intermediate levels of symbolic theology has been
just as harmful to a full and adequate theology of mystical ex-
perience as the unwillingness to move beyond the level of images
and ideas into the darkness of unknowing. This accounts for the
emphasis in these conferences on theoria physike—natural con-
templation29—the intermediate stage in the model of spiritual
29. On September 24, 1961 Merton writes to Abdul Aziz that “the interme-
diate realm of what the Greek Fathers called theoria physike (natural contempla-
tion) . . . deals with the symbols and images of things and their character as
words or manifestations of God the Creator, whose wisdom is in them” (Hidden
Ground of Love, 50). Merton initially provides a brief discussion of theoria physike
(or physica, as he calls it there) in The Ascent to Truth (New York: Harcourt, Brace,
1951), 27–28, and again in The Inner Experience: Notes on Contemplation, ed. Wil-
liam H. Shannon (San Francisco: HarperCollins, 2003), 67–68.
xxx An Introduction to Christian Mysticism
development first formulated by Evagrius, between the ascetical

effort of praktike and the contemplative heights of theologia—im-
ageless contemplation of the Trinity. As he points out in connec-
tion with Dionysius, “both in the West and in the East there
developed a tendency to go directly from the ascetic life to con-
templation without forms, without passing through theoria
physike, in the Middle Ages. This is certainly as meaningful a fact
as the separation between spirituality and scientific theology,
probably much more meaningful. It is here really that the sepa-
ration has its most disastrous effect” (137).
With their affirmation of the goodness of creation, their ap-
peal to a “sophianic” consciousness, their attentiveness to the
“epiphanies” of the hidden logos, the principle of order, in Shaker
handicrafts and in the primitivist art of the Douanier Rousseau,
Merton’s reflections on theoria physike, drawn particularly from
the writings of Maximus the Confessor (as interpreted by Hans
Urs von Balthasar), are unquestionably among the most evocative
and fully realized sections of this entire set of conferences, and
not surprisingly the section that has attracted the most attention
from scholars.30 Merton defines theoria physike as “a contempla-
tion according to nature (physis) . . . . a contemplation of God
30. See Donald P. St. John, “The Flowering of Natural Contemplation:

Some Notes on Theoria Physike in Thomas Merton’s Unpublished An Introduction
to Christian Mysticism,” The Merton Seasonal, 23.2 (Summer 1998), 13–16; and A.
M. Allchin, “The Prayer of the Heart and Natural Contemplation: A Foreword
to Thomas Merton’s Lecture Notes on St. Maximus,” in Bernadette Dieker and
Jonathan Montaldo, eds., Merton and Hesychasm: The Prayer of the Heart (Louis-
ville: Fons Vitae, 2003), 419–29. Kramer’s article, though more a survey of the
set of conferences as a whole, also devotes particular attention to this section
(347–51), as do Allchin in his earlier article, “The Worship of the Whole Crea-
tion: Merton & the Eastern Fathers,” The Merton Annual, 5 (1992), 189–204 (see
195–98), reprinted in Merton & Hesychasm, 103–20 (see 109–12); and Basil Pen-
nington in “Thomas Merton and Byzantine Spirituality,” Toward an Integrated
Humanity: Thomas Merton’s Journey, ed. M. Basil Pennington, ocso, Cistercian
Studies [CS], vol. 103 (Kalamazoo, MI: Cistercian Publications, 1988), 132–48
(see 135–38), reprinted in Merton & Hesychasm, 153–68 (see 155–58). This is also
the only section of these notes that has been previously published: Merton &
Introduction xxxi
in and through nature, in and through things He has created, in

history. . . . the gnosis that apprehends the wisdom and glory
of God, especially His wisdom as Creator and Redeemer” (122). It
is a recognition of the inner coherence, the logos, of creatures and
of the creation as a whole, a recognition and appreciation of the
loving presence of the Creator in the creature; it is the transition
point between active and contemplative lives, arising from a
synergy between human effort and divine gift, providing “pen-
etrating intuitions” (122) into the intelligibility of all that God
has made. While in Evagrius and Maximus theoria physike culmi-
nates in awareness of pure intelligences, the angelic realm, Mer-
ton’s focus is above all on the natural world as an epiphany of
the divine, on the “sophianic” vision of God’s active presence in
the world that results not simply in insight but in personal
transformation:
Man by theoria is able to unite the hidden wisdom of God

in things with the hidden light of wisdom in himself. The
meeting and marriage of these two brings about a resplen-
dent clarity within man himself, and this clarity is the pres-
ence of Divine Wisdom fully recognized and active in him.
Thus man becomes a mirror of the divine glory, and is re-
splendent with divine truth not only in his mind but in his
life. He is filled with the light of wisdom which shines forth
in him, and thus God is glorified in him. (125–26)
This indwelling wisdom is not only the source of reformation

of the being of the person as reflecting and participating in the
divine likeness, but of human activity as sharing in the divine
creativity.31 The human person does not merely observe the
Hesychasm, 431–45 (along with the table of contents of the entire text up to but
not including the material on spiritual direction: 409–18).
31. The perspective here is very similar to that found in Merton’s essay
“Theology of Creativity” (Thomas Merton, Literary Essays, ed. Brother Patrick
Hart [New York: New Directions, 1981], 355–70), first published as part of a
three-part symposium in The American Benedictine Review, 11 (Sept.–Dec., 1960),
197–213.
xxxii An Introduction to Christian Mysticism
sacramentality of God’s works but “exercises a spiritualizing

influence in the world by the work of his hands which is in ac-
cord with the creative wisdom of God in things and in history” (126).
Theoria physike is at the heart of a genuine theology of creativity,
which is thus an intrinsic element of the mystical journey to union
with God. “God Himself hands over to man, when he is thus
purified and enlightened, and united with the divine will, a cer-
tain creative initiative of his own, in political life, in art, in spiri-
tual life, in worship: man is then endowed with a causality of his
own” (126). Conversely, the absence of this sapiential perception
of the material world, a purely instrumental relationship to na-
ture, leads to a degradation of creation through an “impersonal,
pragmatic, quantitative exploitation and manipulation of things”
which “is deliberately indifferent to their logoi . . . . a demonic
cult of change, and ‘exchange’—consumption, production, de-
struction, for their own sakes” (130). Hence authentic contempla-
tion, the cultivation of a consciousness oriented to wisdom, is of
tremendous practical importance in a world increasingly tempted
by a “demonic pseudo-contemplation, {a} mystique of technics
and production” (130).
Merton’s emphasis on the importance of theoria physike and
his characterization of it as “partly mystical and partly natural,”
marked by “a manifest synergy of God and man in its action”
(123) is in accord with his support of the position that the sepa-
ration of asceticism and mysticism, the bios praktikos and the bios
theoretikos, is “an unfortunate modern development” (21) that
treats contemplation as a rarified experience that is limited to the
lives of a select few. He rejects the notion that there are “two
kinds of Christian perfection, one ordinary, for all: ascetic perfection;
the other extraordinary, abnormal, unique, for very few special souls:
the mystical way” and affirms that “Mysticism and asceticism form
an organic whole. . . . Asceticism leads normally to mystical
life; at least it disposes for it, though of course the mystical life,
its normal fulfillment, remains a pure gift of God” (22). He is thus
in sympathy with the position taken by Canon Saudreau and the
Dominican school in the early twentieth-century controversy
Introduction xxxiii
with Poulain about the relationship between asceticism and mys-

ticism that “contemplation is the normal flowering of the Bap-
tismal vocation” (27) (though he would not endorse the conclusion
of the former group that the reason that most people do not reach
the heights of contemplative union in this life is due to their own
culpable failure to respond to grace). The central truth for Merton
is that participation in the divine life (theosis, divinization) has
already been made possible for all through Christ’s life, death
and resurrection, and the manner in which, or even the degree
to which, one experiences this participation in the present life is
less significant than the fact that one has responded to the invita-
tion to life in Christ and has committed oneself to the process of
journeying with Christ into the infinite abyss of divine love, a
journey that according to Gregory of Nyssa’s idea of epektasis, or
unending progress (82), begins in this world but will continue
for all eternity. Calculating stages of spiritual development is of
limited value when the goal infinitely transcends all limits. Hence
Merton’s impatience with the myriad and ultimately unsatisfying
classifications devised by commentators on St. Teresa of Avila
(241), or even with the sharp distinction drawn between acquired
and infused contemplation,32 a distinction unknown to patristic
and medieval theologians that “really obscures the essential
issue” (121), and can be applied only awkwardly and artificially
to such crucial phases of the spiritual life as theoria physike. Grace
is operative along the entire spectrum of authentic religious ex-
perience, and trying to determine at exactly what point that ex-
perience can officially be termed “mystical” can be both
32. For a thorough recent survey of this issue, strongly critical of the tra-
ditional notion of acquired contemplation, see James Arraj, From St. John of the
Cross to Us: The Story of a 400 Year Long Misunderstanding and What it Means for the
Future of Christian Mysticism (Chiloquin, OR: Inner Growth Books, 1999), which
includes a brief discussion of Merton’s Ascent to Truth (202–204); a moderate,
non-polemical presentation of the Carmelite position in favor of acquired con-
templation is provided by Gabriel of Saint Mary Magdalene, ocd, in “Acquired
Contemplation,” available in English as the second part of his St. John of the Cross:
Doctor of Divine Love and Contemplation (Westminster, MD: Newman, 1946).
xxxiv An Introduction to Christian Mysticism
misleading and harmful. As he remarks concerning the spiritual

senses, “It would be fatal for directors to systematically seek out
manifestations of each spiritual sense in order to determine
whether or not they were dealing with ‘a mystic’ (!!)” (89).
While Merton affirms the universal call to contemplation in
these conferences, he is also particularly concerned to explore
how that call is heard and followed in the monastic context in
which he and his audience are living. Even though only two of
the figures to whom he gives extended attention are monks, and
both of these—Evagrius and Maximus—are from the Eastern
Church, and although he is quite critical of Dom Butler’s efforts
to identify a distinctive “Western” mystical tradition based on
what he admits “is most familiar in our own Benedictine family”
(31), from the outset Merton identifies the purpose of the confer-
ences as “an effort to broaden the horizons and deepen the per-
spectives of mystical theology in a monastic setting” (3). He is
intent on countering any sort of “monastic parochialism” that
would restrict the focus of a monk’s knowledge and reading to
works emanating from the cloister. Having been thoroughly
formed in their own Benedictine and Cistercian tradition in the
novitiate and juniorate, these students of pastoral theology are
ready to have their horizons broadened to encompass the entire
mystical tradition of the Church as an integral part of their reli-
gious inheritance and a crucial part of their spiritual formation.
It is worth noting that Merton’s approach to the material leading
up to the period of the high Middle Ages, the era of the founding
of the Cistercians in 1098, tends to be largely, though not exclu-
sively, thematic, covering as it does the patristic period and the
“monastic centuries” that his students would be already familiar
with from previous courses, while the material on the later
Middle Ages (thirteenth through fifteenth centuries) is more a
chronological survey that acquaints the audience with key figures
and movements with more breadth and rather less depth. This
approach is perhaps due to some extent to the pressures of time,
but also makes sure the students have at least some basic famil-
iarity with how the spiritual tradition develops after the “golden
Introduction xxxv
age” of Cistercian writers in the twelfth century. The approach

changes yet again when Merton reaches the sixteenth century,
with a detailed study of Teresa of Avila’s teaching on contempla-
tion, which has been so influential on the modern theory and
practice of the spiritual life. If Merton thought that this was as
far as he would get in the course, as apparently he did, he decided
to give his students a thorough exposure to this classic teaching
rather than racing to reach the present in what could only have
been a superficial and unsatisfying overview. When the classes
were unexpectedly extended, rather than resume the chronologi-
cal survey he elected to turn his attention to the issue of spiritual
direction that he had already been researching for the New Catho-
lic Encyclopedia, which had the advantage of having practical
relevance to a class of monastic priests whose “pastoral” respon-
sibilities would be largely if not exclusively focused on providing
direction, to other members of the community and perhaps to
non-monastic retreatants and correspondents. Hence the “mo-
nastic” focus of these final sections becomes more explicit and
prominent, as Merton highlights the value, indeed the superior
value, of the “moderate . . . traditional and monastic” approach
to spiritual direction, with its emphasis on “both the spiritual
authority (as opposed to juridical authority) of the director and
the spontaneity of the relationship between the one directed and
the director” (260), as compared with the highly institutionalized
and overly casual approaches to direction he labels “type A” and
“type B.” After this thematic and historical overview of spiritual
direction, Merton was able to integrate this material with his
earlier discussion of St. Teresa by examining the role of direction
in “the crises of the mystical life” (294) as exemplified by Teresa’s
own experiences, positive and negative, with her directors and
to move from there to the teaching of John of the Cross on direc-
tion, and more broadly to his teaching on the nights of sense and
spirit that have at best an indirect connection with the ostensible
topic of spiritual direction, but which enable him to bring the
set of conferences to an appropriate conclusion by giving the
young monks at least some exposure to a figure of such formative
xxxvi An Introduction to Christian Mysticism
significance to his own spiritual development, and so prominent

and influential a “modern” representative of the ancient apophatic
tradition of mysticism that Merton had highlighted in earlier
sections of the course.
Apparently prompted by factors extrinsic to the course as
initially planned, the abrupt shift of subject matter in the two
final sections, while ultimately woven, somewhat tenuously, into
the overall design, is a reminder that An Introduction to Christian
Mysticism should not be approached or evaluated as a finished
product but as the record of a process, an opportunity to discover
what Fr. Louis considered to be essential materials on the Chris-
tian mystical tradition with which fully formed members of his
monastic community should have at least a basic familiarity. In
the absence of recordings of the actual classes,33 it provides the
only access to this unique occasion when Gethsemani’s novice
master instructed a group composed of professed and ordained
monks. As such it occupies a singular place in the series of Mer-
ton’s monastic conferences. Because of the subject matter it has
attracted, and perhaps will continue to attract, somewhat more
attention than the novitiate conferences on various aspects of the
specifically monastic tradition. But it is important to keep in mind
the character of the material as lecture notes and so to avoid
higher expectations of consistency, completeness or stylistic pol-
ish than such a “genre” is intended to provide. In the section on
the spiritual senses, for example, Merton initially states, “When
we talk of the spiritual senses we are talking of a very special
apprehension of God which is in no way dependent on the bodily
or interior senses” (83). This is to guard against any inclination
simply to identify mystical experience with visions, auditions
and other “paranormal” experiences. Yet he later cites with evi-
dent agreement the position of Dom Anselm Stolz that “the ex-
ercise of the spiritual senses is not a matter of an extraordinary
33. Merton’s novitiate classes began to be taped only in late April 1962 (for
details see Cassian and the Fathers, xlvii).
Introduction xxxvii
psychological act, nor is it a matter of special spiritual senses in

the soul which are opposed to the bodily senses, but rather an exer-
cise of the spiritualized senses on a mystical level” (91), and sees
this approach as in accord with the teachers of the Oriental
Church, who “do not try to account for mystical apprehensions by
pointing to the senses; rather they try to account for the share of
the senses in mystical experience. Mystical experience is spiritual,
and it reaches the senses in a spiritual way through and in the spirit.
The ‘spiritual senses’ are thus the senses themselves, but spiri-
tualized and under the sway of the spirit, rather than new spiri-
tual faculties” (91). There is an inconsistency, in fact a flat
contradiction, between Merton’s initial statement and these later
comments, part of a handwritten insert that was not part of the
original discussion of the spiritual senses. Had these notes been
prepared for publication, Merton would surely have rewritten
this section to remove the incompatibility between these state-
ments; as it was, his discovery of new sources providing new
perspectives and insights prompted him to incorporate them into
the notes without attempting to reconcile them with what had
been said earlier. It is interesting to note that it is the class on the
spiritual senses that Merton mentions as prompting a lively dis-
cussion at the hermitage—perhaps it was consideration of the
inconsistency between these positions that accounted for part of
the liveliness. In any case, this example makes clear that the notes
are a work in progress and need to be regarded as such. This does
not diminish the value of these lectures if they are approached
as a record of Thomas Merton’s ongoing engagement with the
Christian contemplative tradition and of his role in communicat-
ing the riches of this tradition to other members of his monastic
community, rather than as any sort of definitive treatment of
Christian mysticism or as a definitive statement of Merton’s own
knowledge and evaluation of the mystics.
*******
In fact it is clear that preparing and teaching this course was
as much a stimulus to as a product of Merton’s engagement with
xxxviii An Introduction to Christian Mysticism
the mystical tradition. As so often, his enthusiasm for a particular

figure or topic drew him into deeper exploration. One such figure
is the fourteenth-century Flemish Béguine mystic Hadewijch of
Brabant; Merton’s friend, the Carthusian Jean-Baptiste Porion,34
had evidently sent Merton his translation of Hadewijch soon
after it was published in 1955, but until now Merton had not paid
it much attention. On May 7, shortly before the “official” course
ends, he comments in the journal, “Have finally after five—no,
seven, years got down to work on the remarkable little book of
Dom . . . Porion on Hadewijch. The introduction is full of infor-
mation and of sagacious remarks. A really new and clear perspec-
tive.” He adds, “I am more and more fascinated by the mysticism
of the late Middle Ages, with its defects and its qualities. The
whole scope of the vast movement going back to the Cistercians,
Joachim [de {Fiore}], St. Francis, the Béguines, the Cathari, the
Spirituals, assimilated fully by the Church in the great Rhenish
mystics . . . We have not even begun to understand all this, or
appreciate its purport.”35 Merton relied heavily on Porion’s in-
troduction for his discussion not only of Hadewijch but of the
entire period, and ended up inserting two handwritten pages of
34. Porion was a Carthusian monk of La Grande Chartreuse who later

became the Procurator General of the Order—two letters from Merton’s cor-
respondence with him are included in Thomas Merton, The School of Charity:
Letters on Religious Renewal and Spiritual Direction, ed. Patrick Hart (New York:
Farrar, Straus, Giroux, 1990): the first, from February 9, 1952, in which he com-
ments, “You are Carthusian precisely because you are yourself: you are a man
who loves God, in sympathy with Ruysbroeck and Hadjewich [sic], etc., in a
Charterhouse” (33); the second (School of Charity, 210–11), written March 22,
1964, concerns Merton’s dedication to him of his translation of a letter of Gui-
go the Carthusian (The Solitary Life [Worcester: Stanbrook Abbey Press, 1963]).
Dom Porion later collaborated with Merton and Dom André Louf on the state-
ment entitled “Contemplatives and the Crisis of Faith,” addressed to the Synod
of Bishops meeting in Rome in October 1967 (published in Thomas Merton,
The Monastic Journey, ed. Brother Patrick Hart [Kansas City: Sheed, Andrews &
McMeel, 1977], 174–78).
35. Turning Toward the World, 117 (text reads “Fione”).
Introduction xxxix
translated excerpts from the poems of Hadewijch into his confer-

ence notes.
Other new or renewed engagement with primary sources
had less impact on the actual text of the conferences. On April 2,
Easter Sunday, he writes in his journal of beginning to read Greg-
ory of Nyssa’s Homilies on the Canticle of Canticles36—this was
apparently after he had discussed Gregory with the class, since
the material on Gregory precedes (and overlaps with) the topic
of the spiritual senses that was the focus of the March 24 class at
the hermitage. On August 19 he records that he has begun to read
the Theologia Germanica, which the library had just purchased,37
and eight days later, on the fourth Sunday of August, he mentions
the book’s teaching “on the heaven and hell we carry about
within us, and how it is good to experience within one or the
other of these, for there one is in God’s hands.”38 While it is un-
clear exactly where Merton would have been in the now extended
mystical theology course, it seems probable that his interest in
the work was prompted by his reading of secondary sources in
preparing for his classes, rather than his having obtained the text
for the purpose of teaching about it, since it is discussed in fairly
summary fashion, amounting only to a paragraph, in the notes,
and the three brief quotations from the work are not drawn from
the translation he read.
36. Turning Toward the World, 105; Merton will return to Gregory of Nyssa
at the end of the year when a new anthology (From Glory to Glory: Texts from
Gregory of Nyssa’s Mystical Writings) arrives; he writes to Etta Gullick on Decem-
ber 22, “The new book on Gregory of Nyssa by Danielou and Musurillo has
been sent me for review by Scribner’s. I wonder if it is published in England. It
is excellent as far as I have gone with it. A good clear introduction by Danielou
and plenty of the best texts, though unfortunately they are all from the old
Migne edition and not from the new critical edition of Werner Jaeger” (Hidden
Ground of Love, 348). Apparently he never wrote a review of the book.
38. Turning Toward the World, 157; see also the revised version of this pas-
sage in Thomas Merton, Conjectures of a Guilty Bystander (Garden City, NY: Dou-
bleday, 1966), 165.
xl An Introduction to Christian Mysticism
A more extensive example of his work on the course leading

to deeper knowledge of a writer is Clement of Alexandria. All
the citations from Clement in the notes depend on secondary
sources, but on the same day he finishes the “official” course
(May 19), he records in his journal, “Enjoy Clement of Alexandria.
He is underrated and ignored. A great mind and a great Chris-
tian, noble and broad and belonging to antiquity, yet new.”39 On
August 19 he writes that he has finished reading Clement’s Pro-
treptikos and has begun his second work, the Pedagogue, and adds,
“He is certainly one of the Fathers I like best, and with whom I
feel the closest affinity.”40 Three days later he writes to Edward
Deming Andrews, “I am currently very interested in Clement of
Alexandria, one of the earliest Christian ‘Gnostics,’ and his spirit
has much in common with that of Shaker simplicity and joy.”41
By mid-November he has reached the Stromateis, the third book
of Clement’s “trilogy,” and on November 14 he contrasts Adolf
Eichmann’s “sanity” with “the true sanity of Clement of Alex-
andria. His beautiful, clear, clean doctrines full of peace and light.
That we are planted in Christ as in Paradise. His realization of
hope in Christ, Life in the Spirit. There is no other true sanity.
Epistemonike Theosebeia [Understanding fear of God].”42 Five days
later he notes that he is reading the Stromateis “with comfort and
consolation” and adds, “I see no problem at all in his ‘esoteri-
cism.’ Obviously one cannot tell everybody everything, and there
are certain truths for which the vast majority are not and never
will be prepared. I cannot talk to the novices about the things
which are central in my own spiritual life—or not about many
of them, and about none of them directly.”43 He is still reading

43. Turning Toward the World, 181; see also the entry for November 21:
“Once again I am in favor of the esoteric principles of Clement of Alexandria”
(Turning Toward the World, 182).
Introduction xli
Clement on December 4,44 and on December 13 writes to Bruno

Schlesinger of St. Mary’s College at Notre Dame concerning the
proposed Christian Culture program at the college:
Here I might mention someone who I think ought to be

known and consulted as a choragos for our music, and
that is Clement of Alexandria. In fact I think one might
profitably concentrate a great deal of attention on the
Alexandrian school, not only the Christians, but all that
extraordinary complex of trends, the Jewish and gnostic
and neo-Platonist, Philo above all, and then the Desert
Fathers too, just outside. And Origen. And the Palestin-
ians who reacted against Alexandria, and the Antiochians.
Here we have a crucially important seedbed of future de-
velopments. . . . Here again we rejoin the Alexandrians
and Greeks. The purpose of a Christian humanism should
be to liberate man from the mere status of animalis homo
(sarkikos) to at least the level of rationalis (psuchicos) and
better still spiritual, gnostic or pneumatic.45
His interest in Clement led not just to an extended program of

reading. On August 7 he had remarked on “the marvelous open-
ing of the Protreptikos . . . the ‘new song’—the splendid image of
the cricket flying to replace by his song the broken string in the
Lyre of Eunomos at Delphi. Though he repudiates the myth he
uses it splendidly. Humanity a musical instrument for God.”46
Four days later he writes, “The other morning I translated a bit
from Clement of Alex. about Zeus being dead as swan, dead as
44. Turning Toward the World, 184; it is not clear whether Merton ever fin-
ished the lengthy Stromateis: on December 31, 1961 he writes in his journal, “I
haven’t read enough of the things I should be reading and want to read: Clem-
ent, Gregory of Nyssa” (Turning Toward the World, 190).
sage: Conjectures, 170.
xlii An Introduction to Christian Mysticism
eagle, dead as δρακων,”47 and at some point he translated the

passage about the new song as well. He initially thought he might
send these excerpts to Robert Lax for his little poetry broadside
Pax,48 but eventually it developed into a small book of selections,
the original prose transformed into verse, with an introduction.49
On October 20 Merton noted in his journal, “Worked a little this
morning on Clement of Alexandria—the selections and preface.
This is satisfying work, because of my love for him.”50 Four days
later, he writes to his friend and publisher James Laughlin of New
Directions, “Man is now typing a little book I got for you[:] Clem-
ent of Alexandria, introduction and translations about twenty five
pages, selections from his Protreptikos, most interesting both to
philosophers, religion people, Zens, and Classical scholars. I think
you will like this. I think of it as a small format, discreet little
book. . . . It could be very attractive. The ms. will be along in a
few days.”51 On January 19, 1962 he notes that Laughlin had been
to Gethsemani on a visit and agreed to “do the little book on
sage: Conjectures, 172.
48. “Maybe for Paxo translate some Clements of Alexandria” (When Proph-
ecy Still Had a Voice, 226 [8/16/61 letter]); another letter a week later reports:
“Working on Clement of Alexandria” (When Prophecy Still Had a Voice, 227).
49. Thomas Merton, Clement of Alexandria: Selections from the Protreptikos
(New York: New Directions, 1962); the selections, without the introduction, are
also found in the translations section of Thomas Merton, Collected Poems (New
York: New Directions, 1977), 934–42.
51. Thomas Merton and James Laughlin, Selected Letters, ed. David D.
Cooper (New York: Norton, 1997), 181; on November 10 Merton sends the mate-
rial to Lax, commenting, “Here Clammish of Alexandrig. Too long for Pax after
all. Think I do another for Pax, Clammish short introduction with funny sayings
about two pages. This too long. This make book for New Directions. Maybe Pax
take little bit, like last page. Maybe Jubiless take a little bit. . . . This is just a
quick to tell about Clammish” (When Prophecy Still Had a Voice, 229–30). There is
no indication he ever produced additional material for Pax.
Introduction xliii
Clement and the Protreptikos, which is a project I like.”52 Proofs

for the book arrived in mid-March,53 and by the beginning of
November it had appeared and was pronounced by Merton to be
a “most handsome” volume that made him “very pleased.”54
While it did not result in any publication, or even find ex-
tensive expression in the mystical theology notes themselves, it
is clear that Merton’s acquaintance with and appreciation of
Meister Eckhart developed significantly as a consequence of his
involvement with the conferences. In a letter to Dona Luisa
Coomaraswamy shortly before the course began, Merton had
made a rather general comment on Eckhart, apparently in re-
sponse to a question from her: “Eckhart I know. We have here a
popular edition of him, and I have something in French of his. I
like him, and Tauler and Ruysbroeck.”55 It is apparent from sub-
sequent correspondence, however, that even after the “official”
conferences have concluded he is still somewhat ambivalent
about Eckhart, about whom he writes to his Anglican friend Etta
Gullick on June 10, “I like him, but now and again he leaves one
with a sense of being let down, when he goes beyond all bounds.
He is more brilliant than all the other Rhenish mystics and really
more interesting. Yet I like Tauler for a more steady diet.”56 But
52. Turning Toward the World, 195; six days later, however, he comments in his
journal, “I can perhaps withdraw from publication and write only what I deeply
need to write. What is that? The little Clement of Alex. book is not it, I think. Not
the way it stands. But it is to be published” (Turning Toward the World, 197).
53. Merton writes to Laughlin on March 16, “The Clement [of Alexandria]
just got in this morning, I don’t know how it got held up so long, maybe Fr. Ab-
bot wanted to read it or something. But anyway I will look over the suggestions
and shoot it back to you” (Selected Letters, 197).
54. Merton to Laughlin, November 2, 1962 (Selected Letters, 211); see also
his November 17 letter to Ernesto Cardenal (Thomas Merton, The Courage for
Truth: Letters to Writers, ed. Christine M. Bochen [New York: Farrar, Straus, Gi-
roux, 1993], 136).
55. Hidden Ground of Love, 129 [2/12/61].
56. Hidden Ground of Love, 342; see also his May 13 letter to his Pakistani
correspondent Abdul Aziz, in which he compares the Islamic doctrine of Taw-
hid (unity) to the idea of “the ‘Godhead’ beyond ‘God’” in Eckhart and the
xliv An Introduction to Christian Mysticism
Mrs. Gullick is an advocate for Eckhart, and sends along an ar-

ticle on him by a former Benedictine, C. F. Kelley, and eventually
a book by Vladimir Lossky, already a favorite author of Merton.57
On July 1 Merton writes to Mrs. Gullick, “And you are of course
right about Eckhart. He is more and more wonderful, and when
properly interpreted, becomes less ‘way out’ as our beats say.
There is more in one sermon of Eckhart than in volumes of other
people. There is so much packed in between the lines.”58 Three
days later his journal entry reveals that he is fully drawn into
Eckhart’s work for the first time:
I am becoming entranced with Eckhart: I have been won

by the brevity, the incisiveness of his sermons, his way of
piercing straight to the heart of the inner life, the awak-
ened spark, the creative and redeeming word, God born
in us. He is a great man who was pulled down by little
men who thought they could destroy him. Who thought
they could take him to Avignon and have him ruined and
indeed he was ruined in 28 propositions which did not al-
together resemble his joy and his energy and his freedom,
but which could be brought to coincide with words he had
uttered.59
Rhenish mystics, which he describes as “a distinction which caused trouble to

many theologians in the Middle Ages and is not accepted without qualifica-
tions” and “a subtle and difficult theology,” adding “I don’t venture into it with-
out necessity” (Hidden Ground of Love, 49).
57. See Hidden Ground of Love, 343 [letter of July 1, 1961], 344 [letter of July
25, 1961]; Turning Toward the World, 145 [July 26, 1961], 147 [August 3, 1961].
58. Hidden Ground of Love, 343; see also his journal entry for August 6: “To-
day I read the wonderful sermon on the divine truth in which Eckhart says that
as a person about to be struck by a thunderbolt turns toward it, and all the leaves
of a tree about to be struck turn toward it, so one in whom the divine birth is to
take place turns, without realizing, completely toward it” (Turning Toward the
World, 148; see as well the revised version of this passage: Conjectures, 169).
sage: Conjectures, 42–43. On September 16 Merton writes to Pablo Antonio
Cuadra, “I have been studying Meister Eckhart, who is tremendous” (Courage
for Truth, 189).
Introduction xlv
Thus Merton’s engagement with a figure who will be of increas-

ing importance for his work in the last years of his life60 begins
during the course of, though not to any significant extent in the
actual text of, his mystical theology conferences.
The expansion of Merton’s interest in mystical writers during
the months of the mystical theology conferences extended even
beyond the authors discussed in the text. He becomes increasingly
intrigued with the hitherto anonymous fourteenth-century text
The Mirror of Simple Souls, mentioned only in passing in the con-
ferences (183–84), and particularly with the possibility (now
generally accepted) that it was written by the Béguine Marguerite
Porete, who was burned as a heretic at Paris in 1310. Etta Gullick,
once again, seems to have called his attention to the book, as he
writes to her on May 15, “I have heard of The Mirror of Simple Souls.
60. Merton will return to Eckhart particularly during the spring and sum-
mer of 1966, during his time at the hospital for back surgery and its tumultuous
aftermath. See Thomas Merton, Learning to Love: Exploring Solitude and Freedom.
Journals, vol. 6: 1966–1967, ed. Christine M. Bochen (San Francisco: Harper-
Collins, 1997), 38: “The best thing of all was lying reading Eckhart, or sitting up,
when I finally could, copying sentences from the sermons that I can use if I write
on him. It was this that saved me, and when I got back to the hermitage last eve-
ning to say the Easter offices everything else drained off and Eckhart remained
as real. The rest was like something I had imagined” [April 10, 1966—Easter
Sunday]; two days later, he again writes of Eckhart, transposing his thought,
interestingly, into a more “paschal” mode: “Christ died for all that we might no
longer live for ourselves but for him who died for us and rose again. This is the heart
of Eckhart, and remains that in spite of all confusions. At least that is the way
I understand him, though he does speak of the Godhead, and living ‘in’ the
Godhead rather than ‘for Christ’” (Learning to Love, 39); see also the references to
“Eckhart’s Castle” and the “little spark” in Merton’s hospital poem, “With the
World in My Bloodstream” (Collected Poems, 615–18). On Merton and Eckhart,
see: Oliver Davies, “Thomas Merton and Meister Eckhart,” The Merton Journal,
4.2 (Advent 1997), 15–24; Robert Faricy, sj, “On Understanding Thomas Merton:
Merton, Zen, and Eckhart,” Studies in Spirituality, 9 (1999), 189–202; Thomas
O’Meara, op, “Meister Eckhart’s Destiny: In Memory of Thomas Merton,” Spir-
ituality Today, 30 (Sept. 1978), 348–59; Erlinda Paguio, “Blazing in the Spark of
God: Thomas Merton’s References to Meister Eckhart,” The Merton Annual, 5
(1992), 247–62.
xlvi An Introduction to Christian Mysticism
It is attributed to Marguerite Porete, an unfortunate Beguine who

was burned for some very innocent statements. I would like to
get to know this book.”61 On July 1 he writes to her, “It would be
nice if the Mirror were by Marguerite Porete, I feel sorry for her,
and would be pleased if it turned out she had after all written a
very orthodox spiritual ‘classic.’”62 Early the following year he
again refers to the Mirror and the question of authorship in letters
to Mrs. Gullick,63 and later that year she secures a copy of it and
sends it to Merton, who reflects in a journal entry for October 7,
“What a charming and wise book! Yet I think it is Marguerite
Porete who wrote it, and she was burned. What sad, impossible
things have happened in this holy Church!”64 Writing to Mrs.
Gullick later that month to express his gratitude for the gift,
Merton remarks: “Thanks so much for The Mirror of Simple Souls.
I am really enjoying it, though I find that I have a hard time get-
ting anywhere for great lengths in such books. A little goes a long
way. It is an admirable book, but one which one does not really
‘read.’ I hold it in my hand walking about in the woods, as if I
were reading. But it is charming and bold and right.”65 Appar-
ently he does eventually finish reading it, as he writes to E. I.
Watkin in May, 1963: “Recently I have read The Mirror of Simple
Souls, which Etta Gullick lent me. It is a marvelous book, and has
some magnificent and original things in it. And is so splendidly
written. I understand it is by Marguerite Porete, who was burned
at the stake. . . . There is no question that the mystics are the
ones who have kept Christianity going, if anyone has.”66
61. Hidden Ground of Love, 341; see also his letter to her of June 10 (342).
63. Hidden Ground of Love, 350 [January 29, 1962], 351 [March 30, 1962].
66. Hidden Ground of Love, 583; see also his letter to Etta Gullick of March
24, 1963: “how much I love the Mirror and how much I thank you for letting me
keep it. It is really one of my favorite books. . . . The language is wonderful,
the expressions are charming, and of course I like the doctrine. But I can see how
it could have got poor Marguerite in trouble (you see, I am convinced that she
Introduction xlvii
At the very outset of the mystical theology course, no doubt

reflecting on his reading in preparation for the conferences, Mer-
ton had described himself as “still a 14th century man: the cen-
tury of Eckhart, Ruysbroeck, Tauler, the English recluses, the
author of the Cloud, Langland and Chaucer—more an indepen-
dent and a hermit than a community man, by no means an as-
cetic, interested in psychology, a lover of the dark cloud in which
God is found by love.”67 His interest in Marguerite Porete is part
of the same fascination with this era.68 But even more significant
is the blossoming of his love for the English mystics during this
same period, prompted by his preparation of a review of a new
book by David Knowles,69 but also in part by his immersion in
is the author). As you say, one must fear delusion and heresy in such matters as
this, but great simplicity, humility and purity of faith, and above all detachment
from a self that experiences itself in prayer, or a self that desires anything for
itself, is a sure safeguard” (Hidden Ground of Love, 358–59).
68. See also his lengthy reflection five days later on the great figures from the
following century, who are discussed only briefly in the conference notes: “The
saints of the 15th century—are among those who most move me. The collapse
of medieval society, corruption of the clergy, decadence of conventual life—and
there emerge men and women of the laity supremely obedient to God. Especially
Nicholas of Flue and Joan of Arc. Complete and simple signs of contradiction to
worldliness and system and convention and prejudiced interest. Not rebels at
all, but completely meek and submissive instruments of God. In them you see
clearly and movingly revealed what it is not to be a mere rebel but to be obedient
to God as a sign to men, a sign of mercy, a revelation of truth and of power. I am
drawn to these ‘signs’ of God with all the love of my heart, trusting above all in
their love and their intercession, for they live in the glory of God, and I would
not love them if God had not made them ‘sacraments’ to me. St. Catherine of
Genoa also, whom Natasha Spender loves (she keeps wanting me to write about
C. of G.). Note especially the fabulous supernatural providence with which St.
Joan remained obedient to the church while resisting her judges who seemed to
be and claimed to be speaking entirely for the Church” (Turning Toward the World,
100; see also the revised version of this passage: Conjectures, 145).
69. Thomas Merton, Mystics and Zen Masters (New York: Farrar, Straus and
Giroux, 1967), 128–53; this is a revised version of the review article that first ap-
peared in Jubilee (Sept. 1961), 36–40. It is a review not only of David Knowles,
xlviii An Introduction to Christian Mysticism
the period for his conferences, though they are mentioned only
in passing there. Already on Easter (April 2) he speaks of “read-
ing bits of Dame Julian of Norwich”70 the day before, and his
quotation of her most famous phrase in a journal entry at the end
of the same month shows he is still reading her: “There is the
level of faith, on which nothing is seen, and yet there peace is
evident, and it is no self-delusion to say ‘all manner of thing shall
be well’ because experience has repeatedly proved it.”71 A week
later, in the same entry in which he mentions that he has com-
pleted his review, he tells himself, “Must get to know Hilton.
Have been put off by the {Goad} of Love, which is not really his.”72
The faithful Etta Gullick sends him a new translation of The Cloud
of Unknowing in June, and Merton comments in a letter to her of
reading both it and Hilton: “I like the Penguin edition of the
Cloud. It is clear and easy for the contemporary reader. Yet it does
lose some of the richness of the older more concrete English. I
like the fourteenth-century English mystics more and more. I am
reading [Walter Hilton’s] The Scale [of Perfection], which has such
a great deal in it.”73 In late August he quotes from “three wonder-
ful chapters in the Cloud of Unknowing on Martha and Mary,”74
but it is above all to Julian that he is drawn: “all this year I have
been more and more attracted to her,”75 he writes in late October.
The English Mystical Tradition (New York: Harper, 1961) but of Eric Colledge’s
anthology The Medieval Mystics of England (New York: Scribner’s, 1961) and of
Thomas Traherne, Centuries of Meditations (New York: Harper & Brothers, 1960).
71. Turning Toward the World, 113 [April 29, 1961].
72. Turning Toward the World, 117 [May 7, 1961] (text reads “Guard”).
73. Hidden Ground of Love, 343 [July 1, 1961].
74. Turning Toward the World, 156 [August 26, 1961]; on the Cloud, see also
Merton’s Foreword to William Johnston, The Mysticism of the Cloud of Unknow-
ing: A Modern Interpretation (New York: Desclée, 1967), ix–xiv; second ed. (St.
Meinrad, IN: Abbey Press, 1975), vii–xii.
75. Turning Toward the World, 173 [October 23, 1961]. On Merton and Julian,
see Thomas Del Prete, “‘All Shall Be Well’: Merton’s Admiration for Julian of
Norwich,” Spiritual Life, 39.4 (Winter 1993), 209–17.
Introduction xlix
On Christmas day his journal reflection is based on Julian: “the

main thought of my heart (it has been a thought of the heart and
not of the head) is that while Christ is given to me as my life, I
also am given to Him as His joy and His crown (Julian of Nor-
wich) and that he wills to take delight in saving and loving me.”76
Two days later, in a long passage, he declares, “I think the gift of
this Christmas has been the real discovery of Julian of Norwich.
I have long been around her, and hovered at her door, and known
that she was one of my best friends, and just because I was so
sure of her wise friendship I did not make haste to seek what I
now find.” He describes her as “a true theologian, with a greater
clarity and organization and depth even than St. Theresa,” and
praises the way in which she ponders the meaning of her vision-
ary experience: “she really elaborates the content of revelation
as deeply experienced. It is first experienced, then thought, and
the thought deepens again into life, so that all her life the content
of her vision was penetrating her through and through.” He is
struck above all about the way in which she is able peacefully to
live in the midst of the “apparent contradiction” between her
confidence in the ultimate eschatological conviction that “all shall
be made well” and her submission to the Church’s doctrine of
the damnation of the reprobate. This steadfastness serves as an
inspiration and a model for Merton: “I believe that this ‘wise
heart’ I have prayed for is precisely in this—to stay in this hope
and this contradiction, fixed on the certainty of the ‘great deed’—
which alone gives the Christian and spiritual life its true, full
dimension.”77 In a letter to Clare Boothe Luce written this same
week he calls Julian “a mighty theologian, in all her simplicity
and love,”78 and in March of 1962, writing to Sr. Madeleva to ex-
plain why Julian and the other English mystics were omitted
from the mystical theology notes, he calls her “without doubt

sage: Conjectures, 191–92.
78. Witness to Freedom, 26.
one of the most wonderful of all Christian voices” and “with

Newman, the greatest English theologian,” above all because she
has grounded her thinking and writing in “her experience of the
substantial center of the great Christian mystery of Redemp-
tion. . . . the objective mystery of Christ as apprehended by her,
with the mind and formation of a fourteenth-century English
woman.”79 She has become, as Merton writes to Jacques Maritain
at the end of 1962 (comparing her to Maritain’s wife Raïssa): “that
mystic that I love above all others.”80 It is somewhat ironic that
in a text entitled An Introduction to Christian Mysticism the mystic
he loves above all others is not even mentioned, but it was a love
that developed during and after the time when the conferences
were given, and, one may presume, a love that was prepared for
and nourished by the process of researching, composing and
delivering these conferences, particularly those focused on the
fourteenth century.
As this series of journal and correspondence comments on
Julian suggests, for a full appreciation of the mystical theology
notes it is important that they be situated in the context of the
time frame in which they were composed and delivered. The
course was given during the period when Merton was engaged
in revising his early writings on contemplation, a process that
began in 1958 with his essay “Poetry and Contemplation: A Re-
appraisal,”81 a reworking of his 1947 essay “Poetry and the Con-
templative Life,”82 continued with the drafting in 1959 of what
became The Inner Experience, developed from the pamphlet What
79. Witness to Freedom, 43.

80. Courage for Truth, 33.
81. Thomas Merton, Literary Essays, 338-54; first published in Commonweal,
October 24, 1958.
82. Thomas Merton, Figures for an Apocalypse (New York: New Directions,
1947), 95–111; first published in The Commonweal, July 4, 1947. For a comparison
of the two versions, see Patrick F. O’Connell, “Poetry & Contemplation: The
Evolution of Thomas Merton’s Aesthetic,” The Merton Journal, 8.1 (Easter 2001),
2–11.
Introduction li
Is Contemplation? of 1947,83 and culminated in the transformation

of Seeds of Contemplation84 into New Seeds of Contemplation,85 an
undertaking that Merton was working on at the very time that
the mystical theology conferences were being developed and
given.86 Like the new versions of these works, An Introduction to
Christian Mysticism provides evidence of Merton’s mature view
of the contemplative life, seen no longer “as a separate department
of life” but as all of life viewed and lived in the context of God’s
love, “the very fullness of a fully integrated life,” as the new “Au-
thor’s Note” to the poetry essay strikingly puts it.87 The classes
also overlap, if only slightly, what William Shannon has called
“the Year of the Cold War Letters,” (October 1961–October 1962),88
83. Thomas Merton, What Is Contemplation? (Holy Cross, IN: St. Mary’s
College, 1948); a revised version, published in England by Burns & Oates in
1950, is readily available: Thomas Merton, What Is Contemplation? (Springfield,
IL: Templegate, 1981). For a discussion of this work and its relationship to The
Inner Experience, see William H. Shannon, Thomas Merton’s Dark Path: The In-
ner Experience of a Contemplative (New York: Farrar, Straus, Giroux, 1982), 17–33,
72–113, and his introduction to The Inner Experience, vii–xvi.
84. Thomas Merton, Seeds of Contemplation (New York: New Directions,
1949).
85. Thomas Merton, New Seeds of Contemplation (New York: New Directions,
1961); for a comparison of the various versions of Seeds/New Seeds, see Donald
Grayston, Thomas Merton: The Development of a Spiritual Theologian (Lewiston,
NY: Edwin Mellen Press, 1985) and Ruth Fox, osb, “Merton’s Journey from Seeds
to New Seeds,” The Merton Annual, 1 (1988), 249–70; see also Grayston’s parallel-
text edition of the versions: Thomas Merton’s Rewritings: The Five Versions of Seeds/
New Seeds of Contemplation as a Key to the Development of His Thought (Lewiston,
NY: Edwin Mellen Press, 1989).
86. See the journal entry for September 23, 1961: “This week—finished
quickly the galley proofs of New Seeds of Contemplation” (Turning Toward the
World, 164).
87. Literary Essays, 339.
88. William H. Shannon, Silent Lamp: The Thomas Merton Story (New York:
Crossroad, 1992), 215; note also that at the very time that Merton and James
Laughlin were discussing the publication of Merton’s selections from Clement
they were also preparing his collection of articles by various authors on the
atomic threat, Breakthrough to Peace: Twelve Views on the Threat of Thermonuclear
lii An Introduction to Christian Mysticism
when Merton’s newly reawakened social conscience first began

to find expression in articles on war, non-violence, and eventually
race, poverty and the environment. In fact, the very first of the
111 letters collected and distributed in mimeographed form89 is
one from late October to Etta Gullick in which Merton thanks
her for sending articles on Eckhart and E. I. Watkin’s Poets and
Mystics, with its “chapter on Julian, whom I love dearly”;90 the
collection also includes three later letters to Mrs. Gullick, all of
which include material related to the mystics,91 along with two
to Bruno Schlesinger, including the one recommending Clement
of Alexandria,92 and the letter to Sr. Madeleva on the mystical
theology notes themselves and on Julian,93 clear evidence that
for Merton contemplation and action, an interest in mysticism
and a passion for justice, were not alternative but correlative,
both essential ways of being faithful to God’s will for
humanity.
An Introduction to Christian Mysticism is not a definitive or
exhaustive treatment of its subject. It is, as the title indicates, an
introduction, and is even, as its Foreword states, “imperfect and
incomplete.” But it does provide, as the Foreword also states, by
far the most extensive “historical and positive” treatment in all
of Merton’s writings of the “rich thought” of the Christian mysti-
Extermination (New York: New Directions, 1962); see Turning Toward the World,
195: “J. Laughlin was here Tuesday and Wednesday and we worked on the
Peace paperback. He will also do the little book on Clement and the Protreptikos,
which is a project I like” [January 19, 1962].
89. These letters, hitherto available scattered through the five volumes of
Merton’s collected letters, have now been published together: Thomas Merton,
The Cold War Letters, ed. William H. Shannon and Christine M. Bochen (Mary-
knoll, NY: Orbis, 2006).
90. Hidden Ground of Love, 346–47.
91. Hidden Ground of Love, 348-50 [December 22, 1961], 350-53 [March 30,
1962], 355–56 [October 29, 1962].
92. Hidden Ground of Love, 541–43 [December 13, 1961], 543–45 [February
10, 1962].
93. Witness to Freedom, 43–44.
Introduction liii
cal tradition, and is therefore a valuable witness both to Merton’s

own knowledge of and interest in that tradition, and to what
topics, figures and movements he considered it important for
contemporary monks, and by extension contemporary educated
Christians, to be aware of. An Introduction to Christian Mysticism
is thus both a complement to the other writings of its period and
a uniquely significant document in its own right.
*******
The text of An Introduction to Christian Mysticism exists in two
versions. Included in Volume 13 of Merton’s “Collected Essays,”
the 24-volume compendium of published and unpublished ma-
terials assembled and bound at the Abbey of Gethsemani some
time after Merton’s death and now available at the abbey and at
the Thomas Merton Center at Bellarmine University in Louisville,
is a 188-page mimeographed text headed “AN INTRODUCTION
TO CHRISTIAN / MYSTICISM / (From the Apostolic Fathers to
the Council of Trent.) / Lectures given at the Abbey of Gethse-
mani.” It consists of the unnumbered title page; an unnumbered
“Foreword” page; seven unnumbered “Table of Contents” pages,
headed “ASCETICAL & MYSTICAL THEOLOGY”; 170 num-
bered pages of the body of the text; one unnumbered title page
reading “APPENDIX TO MYSTICAL THEOLOGY / Appendix
I. / The SCALA CLAUSTRALIUM.”; four numbered pages of
Appendix 1; four numbered pages of Appendix 2. Except for the
title and Foreword pages, the fifth page of the table of contents,
and the Appendix 1 title page, all the mimeographed pages are
two-sided. This version of the text would have been distributed
to the students at some point towards the end of the course or
shortly after it was finished, and was also sent to other monaster-
ies and various correspondents.
Also at the Bellarmine Merton Center is the original text of
An Introduction to Christian Mysticism, composed by Merton him-
self, which he would have had in front of him as he was giving
the conferences and which was the basic source for the retyped
mimeographed text. It consists of 156 pages, partly typed and
liv An Introduction to Christian Mysticism
partly handwritten, on unlined three-ring paper, heavily modi-

fied by handwritten additions included both on the pages of text
themselves and on the otherwise blank verso pages, with pas-
sages marked for insertion on the recto pages opposite. One hun-
dred ten of the pages are typed, 44 are handwritten, and two are
partly handwritten and partly typed. The text begins with three
preliminary handwritten pages: an epigraph from Evelyn Un-
derhill; the title and Foreword page (marked to be typed as two
separate pages); an outline of the course (later version). Then
follow 141 pages of the text proper: the numbering runs from
page 1 to page 121 (the number “77” is skipped but number “82”
is used twice),94 with twenty additional pages inserted with num-
bers followed by letters.95 The final twelve pages, all handwritten,
consist of a title page for Appendix 1, four pages of Appendix 1,
five pages of Appendix 2, and two additional pages of notes on
Gordon Zahn’s book German Catholics and Hitler’s Wars.96 In ad-
dition, a preliminary handwritten outline of the course is inserted
after page 69.
94. Pages 1–7 (the first two unnumbered) are typed; 8–9 (handwritten),
10–23 (typed; # 18 handwritten; # 22 corrected by hand for typed # 20), 24
(typed), 25 (handwritten), 26–60 (typed; # 46 handwritten; ## 59, 60 corrected by
hand for typed ## 58, 59), 61 (partly handwritten, partly typed), 62–67 (typed),
68 (partly handwritten, partly typed), 69 (typed), 70–72 (handwritten), 73–74
(typed), 75–76, 78 (handwritten), 79–82 (typed), 82–86 (handwritten), 87–105
(typed; # 90 corrected by hand for typed # 89), 106–10 (handwritten), 111–21
(typed).
95. Pages 7a-b (handwritten), 9a-b (typed), 23a-b (handwritten), 27a
(handwritten; unnumbered, but referred to as 27a in a note on the previous
page), 66a-c (handwritten), 68a-b (handwritten), 78a-b (typed), 98a-d (typed),
115a-b (typed).
96. See Merton’s March 1962 letter to Frank Sheed praising this book, pub-
lished by Sheed and Ward, as “a most important and very well-done job of
work” (Witness to Freedom, 45); Merton perhaps associated it with Lifton’s book
on brainwashing and so inserted his notes on it at the back of the mystical the-
ology notes, but the material is not labeled an appendix and is not included in
the mimeograph, so it does not seem to have been considered an actual part of
the mystical theology material.
Introduction lv
This version of the text, typed and handwritten by Merton

himself, serves as copy text for the present edition of An Introduc-
tion to Christian Mysticism, with the following modifications: the
epigraph, which Merton subsequently incorporated into the Fore-
word, the two versions of the outline of the course, and the two
pages of notes on the Zahn book have not been included as part
of the text; they have been transcribed and included in the Textual
Notes found in Appendix A; Merton’s occasional jotted notes for
announcements to the class are not considered text material and
are included neither in the text nor in the textual notes;97 the Table
of Contents from the mimeograph and the occasional places in
the mimeograph where the typist has followed Merton’s direc-
tions to incorporate quotations from printed material that he did
not type or write out himself are included in the text—these latter
additions are listed in the Textual Notes in Appendix A.
All substantive additions made to the text, in order to turn
elliptical or fragmentary statements into complete sentences, are
included in braces, as are the few emendations incorporated di-
rectly into the text, so that the reader can always determine ex-
actly what Merton himself wrote. No effort is made to reproduce
Merton’s rather inconsistent punctuation, paragraphing, abbre-
viations and typographical features; a standardized format for
these features is established that in the judgement of the editor
best represents a synthesis of Merton’s own practice and con-
temporary usage: e.g., all Latin passages are italicized unless
specific parts of a longer passage are underlined by Merton, in
which case the underlined section of the passage is in roman
type; all other passages underlined by Merton are italicized;
words in upper case in the text are printed in small caps; periods
and commas are uniformly included within quotation marks;
patterns of abbreviation and capitalization, very inconsistent in
the copy text, are regularized. Latin passages in the original text
97. These are found on verso pages opposite pages 15, 23, 41, 43, 49, 57, 94,
98a, 100, 118, and the third page of Appendix 1.
lvi An Introduction to Christian Mysticism
are left in Latin but translated by the editor in the notes. All ref-
erences to primary and secondary sources are cited in the notes.
All identified errors in Merton’s text are noted and if possible
corrected. All instances where subsequent research and expanded
knowledge affect Merton’s accuracy are discussed in the notes.
The textual apparatus does not attempt to record every vari-
ation between the different versions of the text. Errors, whether
of omission or of mistranscription, in the mimeograph version
of the text where this is not being used as copy text, are not re-
corded since they have no independent authority vis-à-vis the
copy text. Notes on the text record:
a) all cases in which a reading from the mimeograph ver-

sion is substituted for the copy text—generally limited
to the typist following Merton’s own instructions for
expanding the text; in those cases where Merton’s direc-
tion to expand the text is not followed, the text is left as
it is, the direction is recorded in the textual apparatus,
and the addition is included in the explanatory notes;
b) all on-line corrections Merton made in the process of
typing (i.e., crossing out one word or phrase and imme-
diately substituting another);
c) all handwritten additions or alterations to the original
text.
Thus the textual notes allow the interested reader to distinguish
between the preliminary draft of Merton’s notes and the addi-
tions that he made, presumably before actually delivering the
conference lectures. Since these conferences were given only once,
the additions were made during the same general period as the
original drafting of the text, but they do serve to indicate how
Merton continued to rework his material as he prepared the
conferences.
A list of suggestions for further reading is included as a
second appendix, consisting first of other sources in Merton’s
published works where figures and topics from this volume are
discussed, followed by a list of important recent studies on the
Introduction lvii
major figures and topics of this volume, that will provide helpful
updating on material discussed by Merton.
*******
In conclusion I would like to express my gratitude to all
those who have made this volume possible:
• to the Trustees of the Merton Legacy Trust, Robert Giroux, Anne

McCormick and Tommie O’Callaghan, for permission to pub-
lish the Introduction to Christian Mysticism conferences;
• to the late Robert E. Daggy, former director of the Thomas
Merton Center, Bellarmine College (now University), Louis-
ville, KY, for first alerting me to the project of editing Merton’s
monastic conferences, and for his encouragement in this and
other efforts in Merton studies;
• to E. Rozanne Elder, director of Cistercian Publications, for
continued support for the project of publishing Merton’s
conferences;
• to Brother Patrick Hart, ocso, for his friendship, for continued
encouragement in the publication of the volumes of the confer-
ences in the Monastic Wisdom series, for which he serves as
editor, and for facilitating my research visits to the library at
the Abbey of Gethsemani;
• to Professor Lawrence S. Cunningham of the University of
Notre Dame, for graciously accepting an invitation to provide
the Preface for this volume;
• to Paul M. Pearson, director and archivist of the Merton Center,
and Mark C. Meade, assistant archivist, for their gracious hos-
pitality and valued assistance during my visits to the
Center;
• to the Gannon University Research Committee, which pro-
vided a grant that allowed me to pursue research on this proj-
ect at the Merton Center and at the Abbey of Gethsemani;
• to Mary Beth Earll of the interlibrary loan department of the
Nash Library, Gannon University, for her tireless efforts in
locating and acquiring various obscure volumes;
lviii An Introduction to Christian Mysticism
• to library staff of the Hesburgh Library of the University of

Notre Dame, the Mullen Library of The Catholic University
of America, the St. Anselm’s Abbey Library, Washington, DC,
and the Friedsam Memorial Library of St. Bonaventure Uni-
versity, for assistance in locating important materials in their
collections;
• again and always to my wife Suzanne and our children for
their continual love, support and encouragement in this and
other projects.
AN INTRODUCTION TO
CHRISTIAN MYSTICISM
(From the Apostolic Fathers to the Council of Trent)
Lectures given at the Abbey of Gethsemani

Foreword
These notes are imperfect and incomplete and probably

contain many errors. It has not been possible to carry out our
original intention to discuss St. John of the Cross and the Byzan-
tine mystical tradition. Hence the series is unfinished. These
lectures represent an effort to broaden the horizons and deepen
the perspectives of mystical theology in a monastic setting. The
approach has been mainly historical and positive in an attempt
to recover some of the rich thought of the patristic and medieval
periods, and especially material that has not hitherto been avail-
able in English. The lectures were intended primarily for monas-
tic priests in a course of “pastoral” theology – that is to say for
monks who sought background and contact with sources that
would enable them to be of benefit to their brethren in spiritual
direction or in that sapientiae doctrina which St. Benedict looks
for in superiors. The guiding principle underlying all that is said
here may be expressed in words borrowed from a non-Catholic
writer who has not otherwise been quoted or consulted by us –
namely, Evelyn Underhill: “The essence of mysticism being not
a doctrine but a way of life, its interests require {the existence of}
groups of persons who put its principles into effect.” The idea
. The Rule of St. Benedict in Latin and English, ed. and trans. Justin McCann,
osb (London: Burns, Oates, 1952), c. 64: “Vitae autem merito et sapientiae doctrina
eligatur” (144); (“Let him [the abbot] be chosen for the worthiness of his life and
for the instruction of his wisdom”) (McCann translates: “the merit of his life and
his enlightened wisdom” [145]).
. Evelyn Underhill, “Medieval Mysticism,” The Cambridge Medieval History,
ed. J. R. Tanner, C. W. Previté-Orton, Z. N. Brooke, vol. 7, ch. 26 (Cambridge:
3
that mysticism has “principles” which one can, of set purpose,

“put into effect” may be a little misleading: but in any case, the
Christian mystical tradition is something that has been handed
down not only to be talked about but to be lived.
Vigil of the Assumption, 1961
Cambridge University Press, 1932), 781; the bracketed words are missing in the
Foreword but were included in the quotation of the same sentence that had
originally been placed as the epigraph for the entire volume, apparently before
the Foreword was written.
Table of Contents
I. Aim of the Course—to orientate ascetical knowledge

and discipline to the mystical life page {15}
a) by the achieving a proper perspective regarding
the mystical life
1) through {the} Church’s teaching and tradition
2) treating mystical tradition as the center of the
monastic life, not separate but forming a
whole with dogmatic and moral tradition
b) by bringing out the mystical dimensions of our
theology
c) by treating some great problems that have arisen
regarding mysticism and theology
1) in the ascetical life, and related to mysticism
2) in the mystical life itself, e.g. conflicts,
aberrations, heresies, exaggerations, and
frustration of true development
d) the trend of mysticism from the Fathers to the
present, outlined
e) Scriptural foundations; Cistercian and “Western”
mysticisms will not be presented in detail
II. Various Approaches to Mystical Theology page {19}

a) asceticism, an ascetic; definitions of these terms—
in short, “spiritual training,” i.e. the methods and
principles of spiritual Christian perfection
1) negative side: renunciation of self
2) positive side: following Christ
3. The numbering and lettering of the Table of Contents, particularly of the

subsections, frequently do not correspond precisely to the divisions of the text
itself; pagination is provided only where it is present in the mimeograph.
5
3) extremes to avoid
(a) laxity
(b) Pelagianism
(c) Gnosticism
(d) oversimplification
b) modern separation of asceticism and mysticism page {21}
1) separation a modern notion
2) Fathers saw them as parts of a whole
c) mysticism page {23}
1) false use of word
2) non-Christian, scientific approach
3) Catholic approach page {24}
(a) nineteenth century—inactivity in mystical
theology
(b) twentieth century—before World War II,
controversy; after World War II,
unified approach
(c) characteristic attitudes toward mystical
theology
(1) early attitudes, Saudreau to Butler
(2) post-World War II, Gilson, de Guibert,
etc.
d) theology and spirituality page {36}
1) modern separation
2) necessity of treating these two as parts of
one whole
III. Mystical Theology in St. John’s Gospel page {38}
a) ch. 1: the Word as object and subject of
mysticism
b) ch. 3: rebirth in Christ, i.e., sacramental
mysticism
c) ch. 6: the Eucharist
d) ch. 13: charity, as {the} expression of ch. 6 on
{the} Eucharist
e) ch. 14: following Christ into a new realm
f) ch. 15–17: abiding in Christ
g) ch. 17: vivifying power of Christ
Ascetical and Mystical Theology
IV. The Most Relevant New Testament Texts page {40}

a) St. Paul’s Epistles
b) Acts of the Apostles
V. Martyrs and Gnostics page {42}

a) martyrdom as {the} summit of {the} mystical life
1) St. Ignatius, Tertullian and Cyprian:
martyrdom as {the} crown of eucharistic life
2) relation between martyr and monk
b) gnosis page {49}
1) explanation of Christian gnosis
(a) Justin, initiator of Christian gnosis
(b) Irenaeus on gnosis
(c) Clement of Alexandria, the Gnostic
VI. Divinization and Mysticism page {58}

a) theosis—deificatio—divinization
1) Scriptural texts on divinization
2) Clement of Alexandria on divinization
3) Origen
4) Hippolytus
5) St. Athanasius
6) St. Basil
7) the Cistercian Fathers
b) theoria mystike, theognosis: mystical
contemplation page {67}
1) Greek classical implications
2) Christian use of the term mystic (mystikos)
3) theognosis and theoria mystike
(a) according to Origen
(b) the Cappadocian Fathers
c) the mysticism of the Cappadocian Fathers page {72}
1) true greatness of St. Gregory of Nyssa
2) their influence on Evagrius, Pseudo-
Dionysius, Pseudo-Macarius, St. Maximus, etc.
3) the mysticism of night, or unknowing
4) the Eunomians or Anomean heresy
5) mystical ascent and the three stages of

mystical life
d) the spiritual senses page {82}
1) St. Gregory of Nyssa
2) clarification of terms, and scope of the
spiritual senses
3) special problems created by this doctrine in
the West
4) the tradition of St. Augustine on the Sacred
Humanity of Christ
5) dangers in overemphasizing these senses
6) method of the spiritual senses in Poulain
7) the senses according to {Olphe-Galliard}
8) the approach of Dom Anselm Stolz
9) Gregory Palamas on the spiritual senses
10) Daniélou, in St. Gregory of Nyssa’s tradition
VII. Evagrius Ponticus

a) the problem of Evagrius page {96}
1) his reputation
2) his opponents
3) his allies
b) the life of Evagrius page {98}
c) the rediscovery and teaching of Evagrius page {98}
1) concerning man’s original state
2) demons warring against man
3) the active and contemplative states
(a) the ascent to gnosis
(b) emphasis of God’s grace over our
asceticism
(c) prayer
(d) the question of apatheia
d) comments on Evagrius page {105}
e) the De Oratione of Evagrius
(attributed to “St. Nilus”) page {106}
1) definition of prayer
2) prayer—the culmination of theology
3) psalmody and prayer
4) prayer without distraction

(a) demoniacal temptations
(b) spiritual temptations
(c) false visions
(d) assistance of the good angels
(e) the ascent to prayer
(f) theology, the locus Dei
5) resumé of Evagrius’ thought on prayer
VIII. Contemplation and the Cosmos page {121}

a) definition of theoria physike
1) an analysis of theoria physike
2) Evagrius on this subject
3) St. Maximus and the cosmos
(a) the Three Laws page {126}
(b) the logoi of things
(c) creatures
(d) Logos and mystery
(e) art: logos and epiphany
b) dangers and limitations of theoria physike page {135}
1) a relation between the human and the divine
(a) involves sense and spirit together
(b) demands man’s activity and divine grace
2) alternation and/or delusion of the spiritual
by the sensual
3) sense and spirit must be maintained in the
right order: i.e., subjugation of sense to spirit
IX. The Dionysian Tradition page {136}

a) Pseudo-Dionysius as {the} real propagator of
Christian mystical theology
b) Dionysian writings
1) The Divine Names
2) The Hierarchies
3) Celestial Hierarchy
4) The Ecclesiastical Hierarchy
(a) States of life and orders within
the ecclesiastical hierarchy
10 An Introduction to Christian Mysticism
(b) sacraments
5) the lost book “Symbolic Theology”
6) dominant themes in the writings page {142}
(a) symbolism and mysticism
(b) mystical theology
c) the Dionysian tradition in the West page {144}
1) sources of the tradition
(a) St. Maximus, in Rome
(b) Hilduin’s translations of Denys
(c) Scotus Erigena’s translations
(d) Adam the Carthusian
(e) Hugh of St. Victor and the Victorines
(f) Richard of St. Victor
(g) Cistercians
(1) Bernard and William of St. Thierry
(2) Isaac and Gilbert
(h) the thirteenth century
(1) Franciscan tradition
(2) Albert the Great; Aquinas
(3) Bonaventure
(4) Gallus and his disciples
X. Western Mysticism
a) background of Western mysticism page {156}
1) Augustinian element pervades
(a) all schools have some degree of
Augustinianism
(b) especially in the “bridal mysticism”
of the Rhenish school
2) Pelagian controversy
3) pessimism of Montanists and Manichaeans
4) St. Augustine page {157}
(a) mysticism based on personal experience,
conversion
(1) highly reflexive, subjective, personal mysticism
(2) psychological observation
(3) struggle with evil and ascent to happiness
in love and ecstasy
(4) summit of mystical experience
Ascetical and Mystical Theology 11
5) comparison of Augustine with Gregory

of Nyssa
6) mysticism of the Church in St. Augustine page {163}
b) Western mysticism: Butler’s thesis page {168}
1) pre-Dionysian
2) pre-scholastic
3) without visions and revelations
c) further notes on Latin mysticism page {170}
1) the Cistercians
(a) Joachim of Flora
(b) Joachim’s influence on {the} Franciscans
2) St. Francis of Assisi
3) the Franciscan crisis—a reaction against the
ideal of St. Francis
(a) Brother Elias’s changes
(b) Spiritual Franciscans
4) St. Bonaventure and {the} Franciscan mystical
synthesis
(a) intellectual contemplation page {178}
(b) sapiential contemplation
XI. Fourteenth-Century Mysticism page {181}

a) lay spiritual movements
1) “frauenbewegung”
2) the Béguines and Beghards
(a) influence {of} Cistercian nuns
(b) Hadewijch of Antwerp
(c) The “second” Hadewijch
3) the women saints of {the} late Middle Ages
(a) Catherine of Siena
(b) other great laywomen saints
b) German mystics of the fourteenth century page {195}
1) the German development outlined
2) Eckhart (1260–1327)
(a) his doctrine
(b) the errors in his teaching
(c) specific errors
3) John Tauler (1300–1361) page {206}
(a) psychology of Tauler
(b) two texts from Tauler

(c) Tauler and Eckhart compared
4) Henry Suso: a “minnesinger” of mystical
love page {211}
5) Theologia Germanica page {212}
(a) familiar mystical themes
(b) minimization of personal action in
asceticism
6) summary of the German mystics page {213}
c) the reaction to German mysticism page {214}
1) defenders of Eckhart and German mystics
(a) Nicholas of Cusa
(b) Martin Luther
2) attacks on the Rhenish mystics
(a) Cardinal D’Ailly
(b) J. Gerson
(c) the Devotio Moderna
(d) Gerhard Groote
(e) Brethren of the Common Life
(f) Thomas à Kempis
(g) sixteenth century: the Inquisition
(h) J. P. Camus (1640)
(i) the Jesuits
d) summary and outline of the late Middle Ages page {219}
XI. Spanish Mysticism

a) the background page {221}
1) Spanish mysticism appears in Spain’s
Golden Age
2) reformers
(a) Cardinal Francisco Ximenes de Cisneros
(b) Ven. Garcia de Cisneros
(c) Erasmianism of the 1520s
(d) illuminism
(e) the Inquisition
(f) spiritual writers: Juan de Avila,
Luis de Granada, Peter of Alcantara, Francisco de
Osuna
b) the Carmelite School page {232}

1) St. Teresa of Avila
(a) experiences and prayer
(b) Carmelite constitutions on prayer
(c) Teresian school of contemplation
2) classical Carmelite treatment of prayer {236}
(a) pre-contemplation
(b) contemplation
3) the nature of contemplation {241}
4) The call to contemplation {246}
XI{A}. The Spiritual Direction of Contemplatives {251}

a) questions and objections
1) is spiritual direction necessary?
b) the mind of the Church {254}
1) Brethren of {the} Holy Spirit condemned
2) Leo xiii in Testem Benevolentiae
3) Menti Nostrae—Pope Pius xii
4) French Bishops—1951 directive
c) what is spiritual direction?
1) strict, technical and “modern” view {256}
2) broad, and pre-technical {258}
3) the monastic view {260}
d) history of spiritual direction in the Church {262}
1) classical background
2) early Christian monasticism in {the} Orient {264}
3) Middle Ages—mendicants {267}
4) Counter-Reformation {268}
5) lay directors
e) the occasional director {271}
f) necessity of spiritual direction {272}
g) the authority of the director {274}
h) the function of the director {275}
i) qualities of a director {278}
1) holiness
2) learning
3) experience
4) humility
XII. Direction and Therapy page {280}

1. direction as distinct from counselling,
psychotherapy and psychoanalysis
A. counselling
a) secular
b) Catholic
B. psychotherapy {282}
C. psychoanalysis {283}
2. does {the} director have any use for psychology? {285}
A. types of weakness {287}
a) neurasthenic
b) schizoid
c) cyclothymic
d) paranoid
e) hysterical
3. practical use of this psychological knowledge {290}
A. some general “don’ts”
B. some basic procedures
C. crises of spiritual and affective life {291}
D. vocational crisis in {the} monastery {292}
a) crisis after ordination
b) crisis of full development
XIII. The Spiritual Direction of Contemplatives—

Direction in the Crises of the Mystical Life {294}
A. St. Teresa of Avila and her directors
B. St. John of the Cross—direction in {the} Dark Night {304}
C. good direction—points to follow {316}
D. Dark Night of the Soul {320}
Appendix I—The Scala Claustralium—sive Tractatus de
modo Orandi
4 steps: Lectio—Meditatio—Oratio—Contemplatio
Appendix II—A Note on Brainwashing (“Thought Reform”)
a) its purpose
b) the process of thought reform
I. Introduction
1. Aim of the Course
If this “course” is restricted to twenty-two lectures in the
Pastoral year, it is obviously taken for granted that much else has
been said and taught and assimilated, especially in ascetic the-
ology, before we come to this short series of lectures. Ascetic
theology is prescribed in the novitiate. {It presents the} funda-
mentals of monastic life. The Master of Students should continue
the ascetic formation of the young professed monk, deepening
his monastic life and, especially, orienting his life of studies and
his spiritual growth toward the monastic priesthood. There are
retreats, constant sermons and conferences, reading. There is
individual direction {and} constant “exercise” in the ascetic life.
Hence for all the years of the monastic life through which the
student has now passed, he has been subjected intensively to as-
cetic formation and has at least gathered some smattering of
knowledge about mystical theology.
Hence the purpose of these lectures is not to cover every
detail and aspect of the subject, but to look over the whole field,
to coordinate and deepen the ascetic knowledge that it is presumed
everybody has, and to orient that asceticism to the mystical life.
The main task will be to situate the subject properly in our life. It
belongs right in the center, of course, {in order} to give the mo-
nastic priest, the future spiritual director and superior, a proper
perspective first of all, then to deepen his knowledge of the
Church’s tradition and teaching, to make him fully acquainted
with the great mystical tradition, which is not separated from
15
the dogmatic and moral tradition but forms one whole with it.
Without mysticism there is no real theology, and without theol-
ogy there is no real mysticism. Hence the emphasis will be on
mysticism as theology, to bring out clearly the mystical dimen-
sions of our theology, hence to help us to do what we must really
do: live our theology. Some think it is sufficient to come to the
monastery to live the Rule. More is required—we must live our
theology, fully, deeply, in its totality. Without this, there is no sanc-
tity. The separation of theology from “spirituality” is a disaster.
This course will also strive to treat of some of the great problems
that have arisen
a) in the ascetic life, and in its relation to mysticism;
b) in the mystical life itself: conflicts, exaggerations, heresies,
aberrations, and the frustration of true development.
We must realize that we are emerging from a long period of
combined anti-mysticism and false mysticism, one aiding and abet-
ting the other. {The} strongly rationalist character of our culture
has affected even theologians, and they have become shy of mys-
ticism as “unscientific.” On the other hand, {there has been a}
flowering of irresponsibility and illuminism, {a} multiplication
of visionaries, etc.
Finally, however, the course will concentrate on the great

witnesses of the Christian mystical tradition, with emphasis on a
return to patristic sources. What we propose to try to do, if possible
(and probably we will not do it), {is} to cover the following ground
(after a preliminary survey of the fundamentals of mysticism in
St. John’s Gospel):
1. The great tradition of the Fathers—the beginnings of
Christian mysticism in and with theology—{they are} insepa-
rable; St. Athanasius and Irenaeus; the Cappadocians, following
Origen and Clement—especially Gregory of Nyssa, {the} Father of
Christian mysticism; then Evagrius and the Desert tradition;
Pseudo-Macarius, who had tremendous influence in the Oriental
tradition (hesychasm); above all, Pseudo-Dionysius, who wrote
the first tract De Mystica Theologia and is the fountainhead (with
Gregory of Nyssa) of the apophatic (dark) tradition which is

equally important in the East and in the West.
2. Tracing the apophatic tradition down into the West, we
will see the growth of mystical theology in the modern sense, the
splitting off of a specialized group of thinkers in reaction against
scholastic “scientific” thought, and their creation of a separate
theology of the interior life; then the Rhenish mystics, on down
through the Carmelites; the Jesuit anti-mystical reaction; the great
St. Teresa and St. John of the Cross; the Quietist heresy.
3. We will pursue this line of thought through modern de-
velopments, when mystical theology becomes more and more of
a backwater and a specialty; controversy in the seventeenth and
eighteenth centuries about semi-Quietism, about acquired and
infused contemplation; this is really a low ebb of mysticism, but
it has been exhaustively treated in the twentieth century.
4. After the complete, or almost complete, extinction of mys-
tical theology in the nineteenth century, a revival of interest starts;
{the} impulse was given, first of all, it would seem, by non-Catho-
lic and non-religious thinkers—“scientists,” pragmatic thinkers
like William James, with his objective and phenomenological
study of The Varieties of Religious Experience. Then Catholics react:
Poulain is a Catholic William James. But first Saudreau restores
. William James, The Varieties of Religious Experience: A Study in Human

Nature, Being the Gifford Lectures on Natural Religion Delivered at Edinburgh in
1901–1902 (New York: Longmans, Green, 1902).
. Augustin-François Poulain, sj, Des Grâces d’Oraison (1901; 10th ed., Paris:
Beauchesne, 1922); ET: The Graces of Interior Prayer: A Treatise on Mystical Theol-
ogy, trans. Leonora L. Yorke Smith (St. Louis: B. Herder, 1950); this work was
first published in 1901, thus predating James.
. Auguste Saudreau, Les Degrés de la Vie Spirituelle (1896; 6th ed., Paris: P.
Téqui, 1935); ET: The Degrees of the Spiritual Life: A Method of Directing Souls ac-
cording to Their Progress in Virtue, 2 vols., trans. Dom Bede Camm, osb (London:
Burns, Oates & Washbourne, 1907); Auguste Saudreau, La Vie d’Union à Dieu et
les Moyens d’y Arriver (Paris: C. Amat, 1901; 3rd ed., 1921); ET: The Life of Union
with God, and the Means of Attaining It: According to the Great Masters of Spiritual-
ity, trans. E. J. Strickland (New York: Benziger, 1927); Auguste Saudreau, L’État
Mystique: Sa Nature, ses Phases (Paris: Vic & Amat, 1903); ET: The Mystical State:
{a} traditional idea of contemplation as the normal end of the

Christian life; controversies in modern times, voluminous litera-
ture on mysticism as a specialty in the early twentieth century,
debates and problems, perhaps not as deep as it seems.
5. If it is still possible we might investigate non-Christian
“mysticism” and see what it is, and evaluate its claims. Finally
we ought to consider the mystical tradition of the Oriental Church
since the lamentable separation.
It will be seen that much has had to be left out—much that
is very important. What is omitted is presumed to be easily at-
tainable in other courses or in readings:
a) foundations of Christian mysticism in Scripture. We will
only give a brief consideration to some of the most fundamental
ideas in St. John’s Gospel. The rest has either been exposed in
other conferences or courses, or can be easily found in the proper
sources.
b) the Cistercian school of mystics has been treated else-
where by us. Rather than take up our limited time with them
here, we will simply remark on them when it is relevant to point
out some similarity or some contrast. However it must be re-
membered that the Cistercian school is to be credited with a very
important development in mystical theology. St. Bernard and
William of St. Thierry are of primary importance in the history of
Christian mysticism.
Its Nature and Phases (New York: Benziger, 1924); Les Faits Extraordinaires de la Vie
Spirituelle: État Angélique—Extase—Révélations—Possessions (Paris: Vic & Amat,
1908); Auguste Saudreau, Manuel de Spiritualité, 3d ed. (Paris: P. Téqui, 1933).
. See “Introduction to Cistercian Theology,” a set of conference notes for a
course given by Merton as master of students and found in volume 15 of “Col-
lected Essays,” the 24-volume bound set of published and unpublished mate-
rials assembled at the Abbey of Gethsemani and available both there and at
the Thomas Merton Center, Bellarmine University, Louisville, KY; see also “Cis-
tercian Fathers and Monastic Theology,” a set of conference notes for a course
given by Merton to novices in 1963, which may be a revision of earlier novitiate
conferences, in volume 20 of “Collected Essays.”
c) the tradition that Butler has called “Western Mysticism” will

seem to be here neglected—again, for the same reasons. It is treated
elsewhere. One lecture will be sufficient. ({See} reading lists.)
2. Various Approaches to the Subject

A. Asceticism. Here we are on relatively simple and familiar
ground. {The} dictionary definition (Oxford Dictionary) {is}: “As-
cetical—pertaining to or treating of the spiritual exercises by
which perfection and virtue may be attained, as in Ascetical The-
ology”; “an ascetic—One of those who in the early church retired
into solitude, to exercise themselves in meditation and prayer,
and in the practice of rigorous self-discipline.” It comes from
the Greek askein: to adorn, to prepare by labor, to make someone
adept by exercises. (Homer uses it for “making a work of art.”10)
{It was} applied to physical culture, moral culture and finally
religious training. It means, in short, training—spiritual training.
The ascetes not only trained themselves in the spiritual warfare,
but bound themselves to do so by public profession of perfect
chastity. Hence ascetic theology is in practice, for us, simply the
study of the training, the methods and principles by which we
are to live out our public consecration to Christ and to Christian
perfection. The whole of Christian aceticism is summed up in
Mark 8:34: “If any man would come after me, let him deny himself,
take up his cross and follow me!” A negative side {involves} renun-
ciation, abnegation of self; a positive side {consists in the} follow-
ing of Christ; {the} development of the Christ-life in us;
development of the life of grace in us; cooperation with the Holy
Spirit more than conformity with a moral or ascetic system.
. Dom Cuthbert Butler, Western Mysticism: The Teaching of SS. Augustine,

Gregory and Bernard on Contemplation and the Contemplative Life, 2nd ed. ([1922];
London: Constable, 1926).
. The Oxford English Dictionary, ed. James Murray, corrected edition, 13
vols. (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1933), 1:679.
10. Homer, Iliad, 23:743: “a highly wrought [h“skhsan] Sidonian bowl.”
Extremes to avoid {include}:

a) laxity—asceticism must be real. {We} must not cherish il-
lusions. {There is} no spiritual life when we are merely attached
to ease, comfort, human consolations.
b) Pelagianism—undue trust in quantitative asceticism—in
severity as such, as if severity were equal to perfection. It is not
true {that} “the more you punish yourself physically, the more
perfect you are.”
c) Gnosticism—the idea that by heroic feats of asceticism we
can force our way stubbornly into the realm of mysticism.
d) oversimplification—making the entire ascetic life consist in
one virtue such as “obedience” or “patience,” or one practice
such as “fasting” or “manual labor,” letting everything else go!
The wholeness of the ascetic life must be maintained.
Read: two important sections from de Guibert—{the} article “Ab-
negation” in DS I, col. 105 bottom, and 108 bottom to 109 end.11
11. Joseph de Guibert, “Abnégation: III. Notion Précise et Doctrine de

l’Abnégation,” Dictionnaire de Spiritualité Ascétique et Mystique [DS], ed. F. Ca-
vallera et al., 17 vols. (Paris: Beauchesne, 1932–95), vol. 1, cols. 101–109: “On this
central role of abnegation, the texts could be multiplied indefinitely: the main
ones have been indicated above (II, Tradition). There are two reasons for its im-
portance. First of all, in the spiritual life, it is in practice the decisive point, the
dominant strategic position whose loss or gain determines the battle for sanctity.
This is proven by experience: in studying the lives of ‘failed saints,’ that is, of
priests, religious, or simple faithful—excellent, fervent and zealous, pious and
devout, but nevertheless, not ‘saints’ in the full sense—one will discover that
what they lacked was not a deep interior life, nor a sincere and vital love for God
and souls, but rather a certain fullness of renunciation, a certain depth of abnega-
tion and completeness in self-forgetfulness, which would have given them over
completely to the work of God in them, an attitude which in contrast strikes us
in true saints” (cols. 105–106); “As far as practice is concerned in the matter of
abnegation, what is important is to follow the working of grace rather than seek-
ing to anticipate it: to let the supernatural light reveal to the soul, or at least allow
it to understand, gradually, the fields extending further and further, the more
and more intimate dimensions where renunciation should be practiced. To show
with discretion how to make progress, one should point out that God will give
a growing understanding of abnegation; it would be imprudent in this matter to
The separation between asceticism and mysticism is an un-

fortunate modern development:
a) {In the} classical distinction of the Fathers, one led natu-
rally to the other: {one begins with the} bios praktikos, active or
want to impose by authority what God has not yet made clear. It is faithfulness to
insights already received, to the small abnegations of daily life, which prepares
the soul for greater sacrifices and deeper insights. It would be imprudent to put
before souls artificially, or for them to put before themselves in their imagination,
heroic sacrifices to which God has not yet led them along the paths of wisdom.
Moreover, in such a case there would be danger not only of discouragement
but of illusion if, carried away by fantasies of sacrifices that God has perhaps
never required, we end up without courage to face those more down-to-earth
sacrifices that are asked of us in our ordinary life. This discretion to follow grace
rather than wanting to outrun it will be the better way to bring about the second
aspect of a fruitful practice of abnegation, peace and interior calm. This should
be properly understood: it is not a question of asking that abnegation cost noth-
ing; it is by definition a cross, a hard and demanding path. But it is quite different
from a painful sacrifice that tears us apart in the depths of ourselves, or from
inquietude, an anxious preoccupation and focus on oneself that unsettles and
paralyzes: such an approach deprives one of peace and should be avoided in
the practice of abnegation. There should be no self-vilification over an omitted
sacrifice, or discouragement about a missed opportunity for self-renunciation;
humble peace in the face even of our cowardice is the indispensable condition
for true generosity. Such an attitude assumes that trust in God, separated from
all trust in ourselves, will be sufficient to allow us to follow the way of abnega-
tion. The critical moment comes when the soul, having responded faithfully to
the initial promptings of grace along this path, feels these promptings becoming
more pressing and more demanding, and asks itself with the terror of someone
throwing himself into a void, ‘Where am I going to end up?’ It is at this point that
the soul must have the humility not to focus on itself and its inadequate powers,
but surrender itself completely in an act of blind trust in God and of generosity
with no second thought. How many fervent souls have remained half-way to
sanctity because they get stuck at this point, because they have not committed
themselves to or have not persevered in these attitudes. Finally, the soul should
be more oriented to the positive dimension of abnegation, to its loving aspect,
seeing it as the liberation of charity in oneself, as a more complete conformation
to Christ, rather than as destruction and negation. This will be immersing oneself
in the full truth of reality, and will also be the way of practicing abnegation in
peace and interior joy” (cols. 108–109).
ascetic life, practice and training in virtue until perfection is

achieved in the relative sense of freedom from inordinate passion.
Then one is prepared for bios theoretikos, contemplative life. But
these two are simply parts of the same whole.
b) In modern times there has arisen a supposed division
between two kinds of Christian perfection, one ordinary, for all:
ascetic perfection; the other extraordinary, abnormal, unique, for very
few special souls: the mystical way.
We shall always presuppose the classic meaning is under-
stood. Mysticism and asceticism form an organic whole. {There
is} no mysticism without asceticism. Asceticism leads normally
to mystical life; at least it disposes for it, though of course the
mystical life, its normal fulfillment, remains a pure gift of God.
Tanquerey12 is supposed to divide ascetic and mystical the-
ology as follows: ascetic—all the theory and practice of the spiri-
tual life up to but exclusive of infused contemplation; mystical
theology: “all that pertains to infused contemplation from the
beginning of the prayer of quiet to the union completed in the
spiritual marriage.”13 We do not intend here to ascend the ladder
of perfection according to Fr. Tanquerey, nor to maintain this
clear separation—not eleven classes of ascetic theology followed
by eleven classes on infused contemplation!
De Guibert prefers to lump them together under one term,
“spiritual theology”: “This term explains that the science of the
spiritual life is a part of theology, and that ascetical and mystical
cannot be separated, and that both have a common purpose, the
spiritual perfection of man.”14 I do not like too much the term “sci-
12. Adolphe Tanquerey, The Spiritual Life: A Treatise on Ascetical and Mysti-
cal Theology, 2nd ed., trans. Herman Branderis (Tournai: Desclée, 1932).
13. Joseph de Guibert, sj, The Theology of the Spiritual Life, trans. Paul Bar-
rett, ofm cap. (New York: Sheed and Ward, 1953), 9; de Guibert is summariz-
ing the position of Tanquerey, whose definition of ascetical theology he quotes
directly earlier in the same sentence.
14. De Guibert, Theology of the Spiritual Life, 10–11 (which reads “theology,
that” and “separated, and finally”).
ence of the spiritual life,” but in general I agree with de Guibert’s

approach here. However, I do not intend to follow the lines laid
down in his text either.
B. Mysticism. Here we are on more difficult ground. No-
where is it more important to define your terms and show where
you really stand. The word mystic (which will be fully defined
below) originally meant “one who was initiated into the myster-
ies.” It has a general, vague sense of someone who experiences
mysterious, esoteric, supra-rational or irrational states, feelings,
intuitions.
a. Wrong use of the word (sometimes as a term of contempt)
identifies mysticism with occultism, spiritualism, theosophy, or
mere aestheticism, {an} escape into feeling. {There is a} danger
of identifying mysticism with narcissism, in some form or other.
Hence, {we must recognize} the importance of self-forgetfulness
in relation to true contemplation and not encouraging souls in
self-consciousness, self-awareness, the taste for self-awareness,
etc., yet {one must} develop true personalism and spontaneity,
as we shall see. Sometimes mysticism is wrongly used to praise
those who are merely in subjective reaction against dogma or
liturgy or set forms of religious life. Mysticism tends easily to be
equated with individualism. Bergson15 is responsible for a distinc-
tion between “two sources” of morality and religion: (a) static:
institutional, authoritarian, dogmatic; (b) dynamic: personal,
independent and spontaneous (inspired). There may be a grain
of truth behind this, but it must not be exaggerated. The two
tendencies really exist but do they lead to two essentially differ-
ent kinds of religion?
b. The non-Christian, scientific approach: William James, {in
his} Varieties of Religious Experience, studies hundreds of cases of
experience, sometimes mystical, sometimes not, {making} very
15. Henri Bergson, Les Deux Sources de la Morale et de la Religion (Paris:

Librairie Félix Alcan, 1932); ET: The Two Sources of Morality and Religion, trans. R.
Ashley Audra and Cloudesley Brereton (New York: Henry Holt, 1932).
little qualitative distinction between them. {He} studies them

clinically as “case histories” but ends up with a sober admission
that these experiences exist and must be taken into account as
being at least of great subjective validity in those who experi-
enced them. James says: “Mystical experiences are, and have the
right to be, authoritative for those that have had them, and those
who have had them not are not in a position to criticize or deny
the validity of the experience; the mystic is invulnerable and
must be left in undisturbed possession of his creed.”16 In a way
he is more open to the acceptance of all mystical experience than
the theologian who sharply distinguishes. We are less tolerant.
We believe that there are standards of judgement that can and
must be objectively applied—those of revelation. However James
ends by concluding: “It must always remain an open question
whether mystical states may not possibly be superior points of
view, windows through which the mind looks out upon a more
extensive and inclusive world.”17
This is the standard position of the educated non-Catholic
in America today—cf. {the} new book Mysticism and Philosophy
by W. T. Stace.18 We need not be unhappy about it. In actual fact,
the witness of religious experience is something that has a pro-
found effect on the non-religious man today, unless he is a com-
plete rationalist and sceptic, or a professional atheist. It is through
this witness, rather than through apologetic arguments, that such
men can more easily be reached.
c. The Catholic approach—in the nineteenth century, {there
was} very little mystical theology {except for the} formal textbook
approach of men like Scaramelli.19 {But note the} unique case of
16. While Butler (Western Mysticism, 137) presents this as a direct quota-
tion, it is actually a summary of James, 422–24.
17. James, 428, quoted in Butler, Western Mysticism, 137.
18. W. T. Stace, Mysticism and Philosophy (Philadelphia: Lippincott, 1960).
19. Giovanni Battista Scaramelli, sj (d. 1752), The Directorium Asceticum, or,
Guide to the Spiritual Life, 8th ed., 4 vols. (London: Burns, Oates & Washbourne,
1924).
Baron Von Hügel.20 Görres’ Mystik21 {is} criticized by Butler22 for

having “two volumes” for divine mysticism and two on diaboli-
cal mysticism.
{The} twentieth century: first of all the resurgence of interest
in Catholic mysticism in the twentieth century was in large part
a reaction stimulated by non-Catholic studies, an attempt at once
to correct errors of the rationalistic approach, to “defend” Catho-
lic mysticism, {and to} separate it from other forms of spirituality
and pseudo-spirituality. To some extent a book like Poulain’s
Graces of {Interior} Prayer23 is an imitation, along Catholic lines,
of the secular phenomenological approach, scientific studies of
documents and cases, but in a theological setting. Butler’s Western
Mysticism is perhaps also to some extent affected. Inductive study
of the texts {characterized these works}.
Before World War II the tendency is a multiplication of more
or less controversial studies, with varying approaches, all affected
by the general atmosphere of debate over certain central ques-
tions, such as the nature of mystical prayer, the vocation to mysti-
cal prayer, {the} problem of {the} distinction between acquired
and infused contemplation, etc. We will discuss later24 some of
the main currents of controversy, especially Poulain, Saudreau.
After World War II the approach is more unified. The contro-
versial aspect is in the background. {There is an} atmosphere of
20. Friedrich von Hügel, The Mystical Element of Religion as Studied in Saint
Catherine of Genoa and Her Friends, 2 vols. (New York: E. P. Dutton, 1908).
21. Johann Joseph von Görres (d. 1848), Die Christliche Mystik, 5 vols. (Re-
gensburg: G. J. Manz, 1836–42); La Mystique Divine, Naturelle et Diobolique, trans.
M. Charles Sainte-Foi (Paris: Mme. Vve Poussielgue-Rusand, 1854–55).
22. Cuthbert Butler, osb, Benedictine Monachism, 2nd ed. (New York: Long-
mans, Green, 1924), 65, quoted in Western Mysticism, 128.
23. Text reads “Mystical.”
24. Merton does not in fact return to this modern controversy, as accord-
ing to his original outlines he had intended to do; an overview of the different
positions is provided by Butler in his “Afterthoughts” to the revised edition of
Western Mysticism (xiii–lxii), and by J. V. Bainvel in his Introduction to the 10th
edition of Poulain (xxxii–cxii).
collaboration and general teamwork: the outstanding works of

this period are often the products of special teams (v.g. {the} col-
laboration of Bouyer, Leclercq, Vandenbroucke and Cognet in
the new Histoire de Spiritualité25), or else the works of individual
authors are still done by men who otherwise appear on these
“teams.” The great monument of the post-war period is the Dic-
tionnaire de Spiritualité,26 started by men who were engaged in
the controversies of the previous period, but including all the
best minds writing in French at the present time. Note: the
“teams” began to appear in the ’20s, though still engaged in
controversy, for instance: the Jesuits of the Revue d’Ascétique et de
Mystique (hereafter RAM) {and} the Dominicans of La Vie Spiri-
tuelle (hereafter VS). (Discuss these two publications.) Also {note
the} importance of Études Carmélitaines; {as well as the} sessions
25. Histoire de Spiritualité, 4 vols.: Louis Bouyer, La Spiritualité du Nouveau

Testament et des Pères (Paris: Aubier, 1960); Jean Leclercq, François Vanden
broucke, Louis Bouyer, La Spiritualité du Moyen Age (Paris: Aubier, 1961); Louis
Bouyer, La Spiritualité Orthodoxe et la Spiritualité Protestante et Anglicane (Paris:
Aubier, 1965); Louis Cognet, La Spiritualité Moderne, Part 1: L’Essor: 1500–1650
(Paris: Aubier, 1966) (the last two volumes were issued after this series of confer-
ences and were therefore unavailable to Merton). The first three volumes were
later translated as The Spirituality of the New Testament and the Fathers, trans. Mary
Perkins Ryan (New York: Seabury, 1963); The Spirituality of the Middle Ages, trans.
Benedictines of Holme Eden Abbey (New York: Seabury, 1968); Orthodox Spir-
ituality and Protestant and Anglican Spirituality, trans. Barbara Wall (New York:
Seabury, 1969) (Bouyer writes [213] that this volume was originally intended as
an appendix to the final volume on modern Catholic spirituality, but was issued
separately when that projected volume swelled to two parts; that volume, the
second part of which never appeared, was not translated into English). Refer-
ences will be given both to the original French (which Merton used), and to the
English translations.
26. Publication of the Dictionnaire had actually begun in 1932 with the ap-
pearance of the first fascicle; the complete volume 1 appeared in 1935; publica-
tion was severely slowed (though not completely interrupted) by World War II
(a fascicle of volume 2 appeared in 1944); at the time of writing, four volumes
had appeared, taking the Dictionnaire up through the letter “E”; three more vol-
umes (through “I”) would appear during Merton’s lifetime.
in psychology and spirituality at Avon-Fontainebleau.27 Note

{that} after the war new reviews have brought in a Biblical em-
phasis ignored before World War II, {and the} influence also of
{the} liturgical revival. There is no lack of magazines; the quality
however is not always high.
Some characteristic attitudes to mystical theology. {In the} early
period (before World War II): note the inadequacy of a few early
writers like Dom Savinien Louismet28 who made “contempla-
tion” something so broad and vague that it embraced almost any
type of affective piety. Canon Saudreau, in 1896, {made an} effort
to recover {the} traditional notion of Christian mysticism through
{the} study of {the} Fathers and “mystical writers,” centered
mainly on {the} thesis that “contemplation is the normal flower-
ing of the Baptismal vocation”29 and all Christians should or at
27. International Conference of Religious Psychology, sponsored by the

French Carmelites; see for example Mystique et Continence: Travaux Scientifiques
des VIIe Congrès International d’Avon, held Sept. 27–30, 1950 and published in
Études Carmélitaines, 32 (1952).
28. Savinien Louismet, osb (d. 1926), The Mystical Knowledge of God: An
Essay in the Art of Knowing and Loving the Divine Majesty (New York: P. J. Kenedy
& Sons, 1917); The Mystical Life (London: Burns, Oates & Washbourne, 1917);
Mysticism, True and False (New York: P. J. Kenedy & Sons, 1918); Divine Contem-
plation for All, or The Simple Art of Communing with God (London: Burns, Oates &
Washbourne, 1921); The Mystery of Jesus (New York: P. J. Kenedy & Sons, 1922);
Mystical Initiation (New York: P. J. Kenedy & Sons, 1923); The Burning Bush: Being
a Treatise on the Ecstatic Contemplation of the Blessed Trinity (Nw York: P. J. Kenedy
& Sons, 1926).
29. This quotation is not found in The Degrees of the Spiritual Life, which
does not refer to baptism at all; chapter VI of Book V, entitled “How Contempla-
tion is Less Rare than is Commonly Supposed” (2.71-94) does maintain that “the
contemplative way is the one to which souls who give themselves up without
reserve to the service of God are ordinarily called” (2.76). Nor is it found in
Saudreau’s Life of Union with God, The Mystical State, Les Faits Extraordinaires de
la Vie Spirituelle or Manuel de Spiritualité; it is also not used in Saudreau’s con-
tribution to the article “Contemplation” in the Dictionnaire de Spiritualité (vol.
2, cols. 2159-71). The idea, though not the exact wording, is found in a letter of
Juan Arintero quoted by Butler in Western Mysticism: “Perfection lies in the full
development of baptismal grace” (xlii) (taken from Bainvel’s Introduction to
Poulain, lxxi).
least can aspire to it. R. Garrigou-Lagrange {is known for} taking up

the arguments of Saudreau and supporting them by a theological
synthesis of St. Thomas and St. John of the Cross.30 This was the
standard “Dominican” thesis in the ’20s and ’30s, strongly pro-
pounded by Fr. Arintero.31 A. Poulain, sj divides mystical and asceti-
cal ways of perfection, {and} supports the doctrine that acquired
and infused contemplation are distinct. {He takes} a phenomeno-
logical approach (see above). {This is at the} center of the contro-
versy of early twentieth-century mystical theologians. {He} tends
to encourage those who identify mysticism with visions, extraor-
dinary experiences. (Read Butler, Western Mysticism, p. 13132—{a}
30. Reginald Garrigou-Lagrange, Perfection Chrétienne et Contemplation

selon S. Thomas d’Aquin et S. Jean de la Croix, 2 vols. (Paris: Éditions du Cerf,
1923); ET: Christian Perfection and Contemplation according to the Teaching of St.
Thomas Aquinas and St. John of the Cross, trans. Sr. M. Timothea Doyle (St. Louis:
Herder, 1937); see also Reginald Garrigou-Lagrange, Les Trois Ages de la Vie Inté-
rieure, Prélude de Celle du Ciel (Paris: Éditions du Cerf, 1938); ET: The Three Ages
of the Interior Life, Prelude of Eternal Life, trans. Sr. M. Timothea Doyle (St. Louis:
Herder, 1947–48).
31. Juan González Arintero, The Mystical Evolution in the Development
and Vitality of the Church, trans. Jordan Aumann (St. Louis: Herder, 1949); Juan
González Arintero, Stages in Prayer, trans. Kathleen Pond (St. Louis: Herder,
1957).
32. “It is a fact to be deplored that devout souls are apt to be frightened
of mysticism by the presentations commonly made of it nowadays, whereby it
is almost identified with a quasi-miraculous state of visions, revelations, and
extraordinary favours frequently affecting the body; so that it is placed on a
sort of pedestal, as a thing to be wondered at and admired respectfully from
beneath, out of reach of all but the small number of select ones called by God
to a privilege so exceptional, the very thought of which as a thing to be practi-
cally desired would be presumption.” Butler does not explicitly mention Pou-
lain here, and it is at least questionable if the reference is to him; while Poulain
limits mysticism proper to a quasi-experimental perception of God, i.e. to the
highest levels of the contemplative life, he does not in fact emphasize these
phenomena, and in his “Afterthoughts” Butler notes the “general agreement”
that exists between the conflicting positions (of Poulain and Saudreau) on “the
sharp distinction between contemplation and even mystic union in itself, and
the accidental accessories that often accompany it—visions, locutions, raptures,
critique of Poulain’s position.) A. Stolz,33 a Benedictine, writing

in the ’30s, returns to the Fathers and endeavors to correct the
perspectives of these other writers by a reappraisal of what the
Fathers really taught, independent of any modern thesis to be
defended. His work may not in all things be satisfactory but it is
an attempt at recovery of {a} sane perspective. Dom C. Butler: as
an example of the early approach, study the opening of his pro-
logue. He claims that he is going to study “the ways of the
mystics.”34
What is a “mystic”? {The} Oxford Dictionary says: “An expo-
nent of mystical theology; also, one who maintains the impor-
tance of this—one who seeks by contemplation and self-surrender
to obtain union with or absorption in the deity, or who believes
in the spiritual apprehension of truths inaccessible to the under-
standing.”35 This is a very sound definition, for general purposes:
it aims at including non-Christian “mysticisms” (absorption
in the deity); it includes the vitally important notion of self-
surrender; it emphasizes the paradoxical ambition to grasp “spir-
itually” truths that are not “understood.”
trances, and so forth. This is important, for in recent times the tendency has
been to throw more and more emphasis on this the non-essential and, it may be
added, undesirable side of mysticism, and indeed in great measure to identify
mysticism with it” (xli).
33. Anselm Stolz, osb, Theologie der Mystik (Ratisbon: Friedrich Pustet,
1936); Théologie de la Mystique (Chevtogne: Éditions des Bénédictins d’Amay,
1947); ET: The Doctrine of Spiritual Perfection, trans. Aidan Williams, osb (St. Lou-
is: Herder, 1938).
34. This is not a direct quotation from Butler, but a summary of his state-
ment that his purpose in Western Mysticism “is to set forth, in their own words,
as a co-ordinated body of doctrine, what three great teachers of mystical theol-
ogy in the Western Church have left on record concerning their own religious
experience, and the theories they based on it” (3).
35. Oxford English Dictionary, 10:175, which reads “maintains the validity
and supreme importance of ‘mystical theology’; one who, whether Christian or
non-Christian, seeks . . . absorption into the Deity, . . . believes in the possibil-
ity of the spiritual apprehension of truths that are inaccessible . . .”
Approaching the “mystics,” Butler says: they may be read

for their theology; they may be studied as witnesses to religious
experience.36 His concern is to study the statements of the mystics
about their religious experience and to evaluate it, determining
whether or not it is objectively true.37 (In this {he was} probably re-
acting against the attitude typified by William James, Bergson,
etc.) In particular, he confines himself to St. Augustine, St. Greg-
ory and St. Bernard. He studies carefully all the important texts
in which they explain what they mean by, and what they have
experienced in, “contemplation”; and then he takes up such re-
lated problems as the relation of contemplation and action, both
in the individual and in the Church.38
One of the most characteristic theses of Butler merits a spe-
cial word here. He stresses the special character of Western mysti-
cism as a mysticism of light, as opposed to Eastern mysticism as a
mysticism of “night,” and he concludes that the genuine Western
mystical tradition is represented by pre-Dionysian authors: Au-
gustine, Gregory, and Bernard.39 The later Western mystics, in-
fluenced by the introduction of the writings of Pseudo-Dionysius
into the West, are, he says, not true to the Western tradition. (This
is aimed especially at St. John of the Cross, but also people like
Tauler, Ruysbroeck, etc.40) This distinction is important and we
36. These are the first and third approaches to mysticism he mentions; the
second is the psychological (or psycho-physiological), that would examine the
bodily concomitants of higher states of prayer (Western Mysticism, 3).
37. The “Epilogue” to Part I (in the revised edition) treats of “The Validity
of the Mystics’ Claim” (133–54).
38. Part I of Western Mysticism (17–154) focuses on the meaning and ex-
perience of contemplation, Part II (155–223) on the relationship of contempla-
tion and action.
39. For a more recent examination of Butler’s thesis, see Rowan Williams,
“Butler’s Western Mysticism: Towards an Assessment,” Downside Review, 102
(1984), 197–215.
40. Butler’s tone is in fact much less polemical than this statement sug-
gests, and clearly recognizes the value of the teachings of John of the Cross,
whom he quotes frequently, as well as of Tauler and Ruysbroeck.
shall see that it comes close to the heart of the matter in these
conferences of ours. However it must be said that Butler’s thesis
is an oversimplification, and that the division has implications
that cannot be fully accepted by anyone who really wants to
understand Christian mysticism. It tends to put undue emphasis
on a particular branch of Christian mystical theology, and exalts
St. Augustine as the “prince of mystics,”41 at the expense of the
great tradition we propose to study. What Dom Butler has given
us is, in fact, what is most familiar in our own Benedictine family.
But even then we must realize the importance of Greek influences
in William of St. Thierry and even in St. Bernard himself.
After World War II—some important studies, written before
or during the war, began to have a great influence in the late ’40s.
Among these, worthy of special mention are those which threw
light on the great Greek mystical theologians—for instance: Danié-
lou, Platonisme et Théologie Mystique42 (St. Gregory of Nyssa); von
Balthasar, Liturgie Cosmique43 (St. Maximus) {and} Présence et Pensée
chez S. Grégoire de Nysse;44 not to mention the studies of Hausherr45
41. Butler, Western Mysticism, 20.

42. Jean Daniélou, sj, Platonisme et Théologie Mystique: Doctrine Spirituelle de
Saint Grégoire de Nysse, rev. ed. (Paris: Éditions Montaigne, 1953).
43. Hans Urs von Balthasar, Liturgie Cosmique: Maxime le Confesseur (Paris:
Aubier, 1947); this is a translation of the original German version: Kosmische Lit-
urgie: Höhe und Krise des griechischen Weltbildes bei Maximus Confessor (Freiburg:
Herder, 1941). A revised edition entitled Kosmische Liturgie: Das Weltbild Maxi-
mus’ des Bekenners (Einsiedeln: Johannes Verlag, 1961) has recently been trans-
lated by Brian E. Daley, sj as Cosmic Liturgy: The Universe According to Maximus
the Confessor (San Francisco: Ignatius Press, 2003).
44. Hans Urs von Balthasar, Présence et Pensée: Essai sur la Philosophie Reli-
gieuse de Grégoire de Nysse (Paris: Beauchesne, 1942); now available in English as
Presence and Thought: Essay on the Religious Philosophy of Gregory of Nyssa, trans.
Mark Sebanc (San Francisco: Ignatius Press, 1995).
45. Irénée Hausherr, “Le Traité de l’Oraison d’Evagre le Pontique (Pseudo-
Nil),” Revue d’Ascétique et de Mystique, 15 (1934), 36–93, 113–70; Irénée Hausherr,
“Le Traité de l’Oraison d’Evagre le Pontique,” Revue d’Ascétique et de Mystique,
40 (1959), 3–26, 121–46, 241–65, 361–85; 41 (1960), 3–35, 137–87.
and Viller46 on Evagrius Ponticus, and his influence on St. Maxi-

mus (in Revue d’Ascetique et de Mystique—RAM). Note also the
tremendous importance of the textual studies of St. Gregory of
Nyssa by Werner Jaeger47 and the restitution to Gregory of the
authorship of the De Instituto Christiano in its full text,48 hitherto
ascribed to St. Macarius; also the clarification of the problem of
Pseudo-Macarius.49 These are technical matters, but their effect is
beginning to make itself felt through the work of great popular-
izers like Bouyer.50 Note also the resurgence of Cistercian studies,
with Dom Leclercq,51 Dom Déchanet (on William of St. Thierry),52
46. M. Viller, “Aux Sources de la Spiritualité de S. Maxime: Les Oeuvres

d’Evagre le Pontique,” Revue d’Ascétique et de Mystique, 11 (1930), 156–84, 239–
68.
47. Gregory of Nyssa, Opera, ed. Werner Jaeger et al., 10 vols. (Leiden: E.
J. Brill, 1952–1990).
48. Werner Jaeger, Two Rediscovered Works of Ancient Christian Literature:
Gregory of Nyssa and Macarius (Leiden, Brill, 1954).
49. I.e., that both homilies and letters traditionally ascribed to the fourth-
century Egyptian hermit Macarius the Great were actually written by a Syrian in
the late fourth century with possible Messalian tendencies; for the most recent
discussion, see Columba Stewart, osb, ‘Working the Earth of the Heart’: The Mes-
salian Controversy in History, Texts, and Language to AD 431 (Oxford: Clarendon
Press, 1991); for Merton’s discussion of this material see Thomas Merton, Cas-
sian and the Fathers: Initiation into the Monastic Tradition, ed. Patrick F. O’Connell,
Monastic Wisdom [MW], vol. 1 (Kalamazoo, MI: Cistercian Publications, 2005),
81–88.
50. Merton is presumably referring here primarily to the first volume of
the Histoire de la Spiritualité, but Bouyer was a prolific author on topics of spir-
ituality and monasticism.
51. Leclercq was a prolific author and editor on monastic topics; Merton
will refer particularly to his seminal work The Love of Learning and the Desire for
God: A Study of Monastic Culture, trans. Catherine Misrahi (New York: Fordham
University Press, 1961); for the correspondence of Merton and Leclercq, see Sur-
vival or Prophecy?: The Letters of Thomas Merton and Jean Leclercq, ed. Patrick Hart
(New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux, 2002).
52. Jean Déchanet, osb, Aux Sources de la Spiritualité de Guillaume de Saint-
Thierry (Bruges: Beyaert, 1940); Guillaume de Saint-Thierry: L’Homme et son Oeuvre
(Bruges: Beyaert, 1942); the latter has been translated as William of St. Thierry:
and the translations of works of Ailred, William, etc. {A} new

edition of St. Bernard53 {is being prepared}. Studies for {the} eighth
centenary of St. Bernard {have been published}.54 Gilson’s Mystical
Theology of St. Bernard55 (written long before, during World War
I) remains a landmark in the new development of mystical the-
ology. Since the war, mystical and ascetical theology has followed
the line suggested by Fr. de Guibert at the Gregorianum, and has
tended more and more to call itself “spirituality.” (He coined the
term “spiritual theology.”) In the secular field since the Second
World War, there has been an ever increasing and widening inter-
est in Oriental mysticism, due to more and more numerous popu-
larizations. In the West there has been, particularly in America, a
great fad for Zen Buddhism, due to the influence of the great work
of Daisetz Suzuki,56 who is one of the most important influences
of the mid-twentieth century, at least in America and England.
The Man and his Work, trans. Richard Strachan, Cistercian Studies [CS], vol. 10
(Spencer, MA: Cistercian Publications, 1972).
53. Sancti Bernardi Opera, ad Fidem Codicum Recensuerunt, ed. Jean Leclercq,
C. H. Talbot and H. M. Rochais, 8 vols. in 9 (Rome: Editiones Cisterciences,
1957–1977).
54. Bernhard von Clairvaux: Mönch und Mystiker—Internationaler Bern-
hardcongress, Mainz, 1953 (Wiesbaden: F. Steiner, 1955); Mélanges Saint Ber-
nard—XXIVe Congrès de l’Association Bourguignonne des Sociétés Savantes
(8e Centenaire de la Morte de Saint Bernard) (Dijon: Association des Amis de
Saint Bernard, 1954); Festschrift zum 800 Jahrgedächtnis des Todes Bernhards von
Clairvaux (Wien: Herold, 1953); Bernard de Clairvaux (Paris: Éditions d’Alsatia,
1953); Sint Bernardus: Voordrachten Gehouden aan de R. K. Universiteit te Nijmegen
bij Gelegenheit von het Achtste Eeuwfeest van zijn Dood (Utrecht, Antwerp: Het
Spectrum, 1953).
55. Étienne Gilson, The Mystical Theology of St. Bernard, trans. A. H. C.
Downes (New York: Sheed & Ward, 1940).
56. Merton possessed copies of Essays in Zen Buddhism, series one, two
and three (London: Rider, 1958) and Manual of Zen Buddhism (London: Rider,
1956); for Merton’s correspondence with Suzuki, see Thomas Merton, The Hid-
den Ground of Love of Love: Letters on Religious Experience and Social Concerns, ed.
William H. Shannon (New York: Farrar, Straus, Giroux, 1985), 560–71.
Orthodox Mysticism—after the Second World War an impor-

tant manual by Vladimir Lossky, Théologie Mystique de l’Église
d’Orient,57 has opened up the forgotten world of Byzantine mysti-
cism, solidly based in the Greek Fathers. Studies of St. Gregory
Palamas, by Meyendorff,58 appearing at the end of the ’50s, and
the new works of Fr. Paul Evdokimov,59 promise that there will
be a very rich flowering in this field. It is here that we must look
for future developments, along with the area where attempts are
being made to understand non-Christian mysticism in the light
of our own contemplation. Here Louis Massignon, with his stud-
ies on Al Hallaj in the ’20s,60 was a pioneer.
57. Vladimir Lossky, Théologie Mystique de l’Église d’Orient (Paris: Aubier

Montaigne, 1944); ET: The Mystical Theology of the Eastern Church (London: James
Clarke, 1957).
58. Jean Meyendorff, St. Grégoire Palamas et la Mystique Orthodoxe (Paris:
Éditions du Seuil, 1959); ET: John Meyendorff, St. Gregory Palamas and Orthodox
Spirituality, trans. Adele Fiske (Crestwood, NY: St. Vladimir’s Seminary Press,
1974); Jean Meyendorff, Introduction à l’Étude de Grégoire Palamas (Paris: Éditions
du Seuil, 1959); ET: John Meyendorff, A Study of Gregory Palamas, trans. George
Lawrence (London: Faith Press, 1964).
59. Merton was particularly interested in La Femme et le Salut du Monde
(Paris: Casterman, 1958) and L’Orthodoxie (Paris: Delachaux et Miestlé, 1959)
(see his appreciative statements on the latter in his journal entries for August
10, 1960 and January 26, 1961 in Thomas Merton, Turning Toward the World: The
Pivotal Years. Journals, vol. 4: 1960–1963, ed. Victor A. Kramer [San Francisco:
HarperCollins, 1996], 90, 91), but also in Evdokimov’s articles on monasticism
and other topics; for Merton’s mistake in thinking that Evdokimov was a priest,
and Merton’s interest in Evdokimov in general, see Rowan Williams, “Bread in
the Wilderness: The Monastic Ideal in Thomas Merton and Paul Evdokimov,” in
Basil Pennington, ocso, ed., One Yet Two: Monastic Tradition East and West, CS 29
(Kalamazoo, MI: Cistercian, 1976), 452–73; reprinted in Bernadette Dieker and
Jonathan Montaldo, eds., Merton and Hesychasm: The Prayer of the Heart (Louis-
ville: Fons Vitae, 2003), 175–96.
60. Louis Massignon, La Passion de Husayn Ibn Mansur Hallaj: Martyr Mys-
tique d’Islam, 4 vols. (1922; Paris: Gallimard, 1975); ET: The Passion of Al-Hallaj:
Mystic and Martyr of Islam, trans. Herbert Mason, 4 vols. (Princeton: Princeton
University Press, 1982); for Merton’s correspondence with Massignon, see
A Few Remarks. What has been said so far is a rambling in-

troduction, necessarily imperfect and incomplete, to the very rich
and varied literature in mystical and spiritual theology. Make no
mistake, there is very much in this field. It is a very active study
at the moment; much is being done. Behind this intellectual effort
is a very real spiritual rebirth, not the spurious and superficial
supposed “religious revival” that has driven people to church
since the atomic bomb, but the deeper revival, the awakening of
the basic need of man for God, which has made itself felt in at
least a small number of Christians forming elites in countries
where the last war had its deepest effects—France, Germany,
Italy. This “spiritual hunger” is a matter of intimate concern to
us because we are doubtless in the monastery for this reason
alone. Hence this study we are about to undertake is absolutely
vital to our vocation. In a sense we will be trying to face “the”
questions which are at the very heart of our spiritual life. We are
here looking at a spiritual movement of which we form a part,
and not a negligible part. However, it is not merely a matter of
study and reading. We must become fully impregnated in our mysti-
cal tradition. Audite et intelligite traditiones quas Deus dedit vobis.61
The mystical tradition of the Church {is} a collective memory and
experience of Christ living and present within her. This tradition
forms and affects the whole man: intellect, memory, will, emotions,
Thomas Merton, Witness to Freedom: Letters in Times of Crisis, ed. William H.

Shannon (New York: Farrar, Straus, Giroux, 1994), 275–81.
61. “Hear and understand the traditions that God has given us” (“Anti-
phon: Feria Quarta Hebdomada Tertia in Quadragesima,” in J. P. Migne, ed., Patro-
logiae Cursus Completus, Series Latina [PL], 221 vols. [Paris: Garnier, 1844–1865],
vol. 78, col. 756C). In a journal entry for March 8, 1961 Merton quotes this pas-
sage and comments, “Moved by this Benedictus antiphon [Lauds]. At a time
when all the healthy traditions are vanishing or being corrupted or destroyed.
We have no memory (as Coomaraswamy says—and as Plato said); instead of
traditions we have neuroses. The loss of tradition is an important factor in the
loss of contemplation—in the fact that contemplation is blocked and sidetracked
by neurosis. Neurosis as false religion and false contemplation” (Turning Toward
the World, 99).
body, skills (arts)—all must be under the sway of the Holy Spirit.
{Note the} important human dimension given by tradition—its
incarnate character. Note especially the memory. If we do not cul-
tivate healthy and conscious traditions we will enter into un-
healthy and unconscious traditions—a kind of collective
disposition to neurosis (N.B. delinquency). Read and commit to
memory the words of God. (N.B. the value of reading Dante, in
whom poetry, theology, mysticism and life are all one—his guide
to {the} vision of God is St. Bernard.62)
Theology and Spirituality—the divorce between them. For
some, theology {is} a penance and effort without value, except
as a chore to be offered up, whereas spirituality is to be studied,
developed, experienced. Hence {there is an} experience of spir-
ituality {but} not {an} experience of theology—this {is} the death
of contemplation. {It promotes} experience of experience and not
experience of revelation and of God revealing. {Note the} danger
of reading “mystical symptoms.” Perhaps in our modern world
we are witnessing a kind of death agony of spirituality—a real
crisis has been reached.
Von Balthasar, in Dieu Vivant (12),63 contrasted the Fathers,
in whom personal experience and dogmatic faith were a living
unity. Mysticism and experience is a servant of revelation, of the
Word, of the Church—not an evasion from service. (However,
his accusation of the Spanish mystics is exaggerated and false.
They were truly biblical and certainly served the Church very
objectively.64) The “saints” today do not exist for theology. What
62. Bernard takes over from Beatrice as Dante’s guide in Canto XXXI of the
Paradiso and continues through the next two cantos to the close of the poem: see
Dante Alighieri, The Divine Comedy: Paradiso, I: Italian Text and Translation, trans.
Charles S. Singleton (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1975), 346–81.
63. Hans von Balthasar, “Théologie et Sainteté,” Dieu Vivant, 12 (1948),
15–31.
64. Von Balthasar, “Théologie et Sainteté,” 24: “Les descriptions de sainte
Thérèse et de saint Jean de la Croix ont pour objet les états mystiques, et c’est
dans ces états que, à parler grossièrement, on atteint ce qui peut s’y reveler
d’objectif. La mystique espagnole se tient ici au role diamétralement opposé
dogma text would quote St. Thérèse? {This is} a great impover-
ishment for the theologians, the saints and the Church herself.
Remember that theology is a sanctuary.
Fr. Georges Florovsky has said, {in} Dieu Vivant (13), “In this
time of temptation and judgement theology becomes again a public
matter, a universal and catholic mission. It is incumbent upon all to
take up spiritual arms. Already we have reached a point where
theological silence, embarrassment, incertitude, lack of articula-
tion in our witness are equal to temptation, to flight before the
enemy. Silence can create disturbance as much as a hasty or in-
decisive answer”65 (especially silence on a vital question of theology
to be lived in the monastery—or giving a stone instead of bread).
“It is precisely because we are thrown into the apocalyptic battle that
we are called upon to do the job of theologians. . . . Theology is called
not only to judge [scientific unbelief] but to heal. We must penetrate
into this world of doubt, of illusion and lies to reply to doubts as
well as reproaches”66 (but not reply with complacent and ambigu-
ous platitudes!—{it} must be {the} word of God lived in us). “A
theological system must not be a mere product of erudition. . . .
It needs the experience of prayer, spiritual concentration, and
pastoral concern. . . . We must answer with a complete system of
thought, by a theological confession. We must experience in ourselves
by intimate suffering all the problems of the soul without faith who does
not seek. . . . The time has come when the refusal of theological
knowledge has become a deadly sin, the mark of complacency
and of lack of love, of pusillanimity and of malignity.”67 (Clearly
à la mystique dogmatique de la Bible.” (“The descriptions of Saint Teresa and

of Saint John of the Cross have for their object mystical states, and it is in these
states that, to speak rudely, one reaches what can be revealed objectively. Span-
ish mysticism is shown here in a role diametrically opposed to the dogmatic
mysticism of the Bible.”)
65. Georges Florovsky, “Les Voies de la Théologie Russe,” Dieu Vivant, 13
(1949), 58.
66. Florovsky, 59–60.
67. Florovsky, 60.
for us monks the problem lies not in reading Poulain etc. but in
becoming first of all real theologians.)
Now let us turn to St. John “the theologian.”
{II.} Mystical Theology in St. John’s Gospel

This is only the briefest outline. There is sufficient material
for a whole course of lectures, for St. John is the theologian—the
greatest mystical doctor of the Church. His Gospel is the true
source of all Christian mysticism, together with the Epistles of
St. Paul. What are the bare outlines, the “bones” of his mysticism?
It is a theology; it is mysticism—{there is} no separation between
the two; both are one in our life in Christ.
Chapter 1: The Word, the true light, in Whom all things are
made, comes into the world to enlighten it (John 1:1-5). He en-
lightens those who, receiving Him by faith, are reborn as sons of God
(John 1:11-13) in a spiritual transformation ({the} basis of the doc-
trine of “divinization” in the Greek Fathers). The Incarnation (John
1:14) is the center of Christian mysticism. Those who do not know
Christ are in darkness. Those who receive Him see His Glory—re-
ceive of His fullness (John 1:14, 16). God indeed is invisible (John
1:18; 1 Tim. 6:16; 1 John 4:12) but His light comes to us in Christ
(John 1:18, 14:6-14, 12:35-37, 3:19) and we know Him in Christ (i.e.
the Father manifests Himself in the Son) (12:44-50, 14:7-9).
Chapter 3: The theme of rebirth in Christ is developed. Sac-
ramental mysticism {is} introduced:
a) a sacramental rebirth (by baptism) (3:5);
b) which gives us the Holy Spirit to be our Life;
c) a rebirth to everlasting life by faith in Christ (3:14-16).
Chapter 6: Sacramental mysticism {is} developed—the
Eucharist:
a) We receive the Incarnate Word and live by Him not only
in faith but in the mystery of Eucharistic communion, which is the
fullness of faith and love (6:32-35);
b) This food gives us everlasting life, {the} resurrection of {the}
body (6:39-40, 48-56);
c) Trinitarian mysticism: the Father draws us to the Son (6:44-

46; cf. Matt. 11:27);
d) Christ lives in us when we eat His Body and we live in
Him (6:57);
e) This is the same kind of union, of “circumincession,” as
the life of the Father in the Son (6:58).
Chapter 13: Sacramental mysticism continued—the “sacra-
ment” of the washing of the feet {is a} sign of union in Christ by
charity and mutual service—the “mystique” of the worship of
God in humble service of one’s brother (13:6-10, 13-17, 34-35)—cf.
chapter 15: love of one another as Christ has loved us—even to death
(15:12-13, 17). Some Remarks: {it is} interesting to take chapters 6
and 13 together as expressions of the same Eucharistic theol-
ogy—the washing of the feet in chapter 13 as a “sacramental”
sign of union in Christ. Service of one another {involves the}
consent to being served, then serving (Peter’s struggle), in token
of the fact that Christ has “emptied Himself” for us even to death.
Liturgy should be seen in the light of this sign of agape. Liturgy
{is thus} not just signs of worship or of sanctification but of God
present in Christ, in us, in our love for one another (external
sign—interior life—Reality). When the sign is properly placed,
its meaning is effected. The eucharistic sign {is both} the “yes”
of God, giving Himself {and} the “yes” of our own hearts, giving
ourselves to one another in Christ. We can say paradoxically: a
full Amen can lead to sanctity and contemplation (!!) leading up
to the full expression of Trinitarian life in the Church (17:21-23).
From the sign to the realization: this is living theology. Realization
fulfills and goes beyond {the} sign; contemplation fulfills and
goes beyond liturgy.
Chapter 14: We are to follow Christ into a new realm (13:36,
14:2-4, 16:22-23, 28). He is the way to the Father (14:6). The Father
will give all we ask in Christ’s Name (14:13)—He will send the Holy
Spirit, {the} Spirit of Truth Whom the world cannot receive (14:17,
15:26-27). We shall know Him—He will be in us (14:17); we shall
know Christ in us and in the Father (14:20-21, 23, 15:10). {The}
only condition {is} that we keep His commandments (14:21-23)—
{a} mysticism of the commandments or words of Christ (14:23, 15:3,

15:7; cf 17:5 f.). {The} Holy Spirit brings to mind Christ’s words
(14:26, 16:13-14). Christ must go for {the} Spirit to come (16:7).
Chapters 15-16: Abiding in Christ—{the} Vine and {the}
Branches: {there must be a} purification of the branches for fruit-
fulness (15:2). Life {means} abiding in Christ (15:4-7), obeying
Christ as He obeys {the} Father (15:10, 9). {This entails} persecu-
tion by the world (15:18-27, 16:1-6, 20-22, 17:13-14). In this per-
secution the Spirit will give testimony of Christ (15:26-27) and
will judge the world (16:9-11).
Chapter 17: Christ has power over all flesh, to give life to
all, for {the} glory of the Father (17:1-3). Eternal life {is} knowl-
edge of {the} Father in {the} Son (17:3). The Son gives the word
of the Father to those who are given Him by the Father (17:5-8,
14). The word of God in us causes opposition and persecution
(17:14); the word of the Father sanctifies us in truth (17:17); the word
{is} transmitted to others by {the} Apostles, and all who receive it are
in Christ and protected by His love (17:20). “That all may be one” {is
a prayer that the} fullness of Trinitarian life {may be} expressed
in {the} Church (17:21-22-23). Conclusion:
a) on earth—to be “made perfect in one” glory (love) mani-
fested (17:23; cf. 16:27-28);
b) out of this world—to the Father in Christ—in His glory
(17:24).
Further important New Testament texts: it is not our intention
to go into the mystical doctrine of St. Paul, as this has been done
in another course (see notes {on} “Sanctity in Epistles of St.
Paul”68). However it is necessary to mention at least two points:
1) The heart of the doctrine of St. Paul is the mystery of
Christ, that is to say not only the Incarnation of the Son of God
68. This is a course Merton gave to scholastics in 1954, found in “Col-

lected Essays,” vol. 23, and published as “Sanctity in the Epistles of St. Paul,”
ed. Chrysogonus Waddell, ocso, Liturgy OCSO, 30.1 (1996), 3–27; 30.2 (1996),
3–23; 30.3 (1996), 15–33; 31.1 (1997), 7–26; 31.2-3 (1997), 3–20.
Who emptied Himself etc. (Phil. 2:5-11), but the unity of all in
Him, the recapitulation of all in Christ (Ephesians 1:10), otherwise
the Mystical Body of Christ.
2) The doctrine of the Mystical Body is inseparable from
Paul’s teaching of our divinization in Christ. This is a complete
transformation beginning at Baptism when we become new men,
dying and rising with Christ, and ending when Christ is all in
all, when the one mystical Christ reaches His full mystical stature
(Ephesians 4:1-16). This is the work of the Holy Spirit (id.), {the}
Spirit of Love.
3) The doctrine of divinization is a doctrine of the renewal
in the same image or likeness to Christ in the Spirit (see Col.
1:15-19; 2 Cor. 3:17 ff.).
4) The mysticism of St. Paul implies a growing consciousness
of this mystery in us until we reach a full mystical understanding
of the mystery of Christ in ourselves. Comment briefly on Ephe-
sians 3:14 ff.: the Father, source of sanctification, strengthens by
the Spirit “in the inner man” “that Christ may dwell in your
hearts . . . . that you, rooted and grounded in love may compre-
hend with all the saints [{n.b. the} Church {as the} center of con-
templation] the love of Christ which surpasses all knowledge.”
These are themes that are later exploited by Christian mystics
thoroughly and completely.
Another important Pauline text must not be neglected here,
2 Cor. 12:1-10: the great visions of Paul (caught up into the third
heaven—note his vision of Christ at his conversion: {the} same?).
At the same time {note} his continued weakness and his complete
dependence on grace—{cf.} the value of his weakness, and the
fact that the great works of Paul and his mysticism came first, the
weakness after. {This is} important for the realities of the Chris-
tian life (pastoral note).
Two crucial texts from the Acts: Acts 2:1: Pentecost {is} crucial
for Christian mysticism, a basic source. {It is} the descent of the
Holy Ghost upon the Church. {Note also the} importance of
Peter’s explanation, {the} fulfillment of {the} promise in Joel.
Mystical life {comes} from the Spirit, {and is lived} in the Church,
as {a} witness of the Living and Risen Christ. (Note {the} typological
use of Ps. 109 {and its} implications for Christian mysticism—its
scriptural roots. {The} Holy Spirit illuminates {the} mind to see
{the} meaning of Scripture in the mystery of Christ and His
Church.) {It reveals the} action of Christ in His Church (v. 33);
{the} common life {is the} expression and witness of the presence
of Christ in His Church. Note—a very ancient formula, going
back to St. Hippolytus, {states,} “I believe in the Holy Spirit, in
the Church, for the resurrection of the flesh.”69 Another text ({the}
Anaphora of the Traditio Apostolica) {reads}: “calling together into
unity all the saints who communicate [sacramentally] in order
to fill them with the Holy Ghost.”70 The work of the Church is to
fill generation after generation with the Holy Ghost and all His
gifts. (Pastoral note: see spiritual direction in this light.) {In} Acts
7:44 f., Stephen, in his long speech explaining {the} Scriptures (he
is full of {the} Holy Ghost [6:3]), finally reaches the erection of the
temple and explodes against the Jews. {He denounces} the earthly
standards which have supplanted the heavenly in Judaism: hence
they “resist the Holy Spirit.” Conflict {is} precipitated: they rush
at him. He is full of the Holy Spirit, and as they rage at him he
looks up and sees Christ in the glory of God. They take him out to
stone him and as he dies he forgives them. This brings us to the
topic of mysticism and martyrdom in the early Church.
III. Martyrs and Gnostics

A. Martyrdom—martyrdom was early regarded as the sum-
mit of the Christian and therefore of the mystical life:
69. Hippolytus, Traditio Apostolica, c. 21 (see Hippolyte de Rome, La Tradi-

tion Apostolique, ed. and trans. Dom B. Botte, osb, Sources Chrétiennes [SC], vol.
11 [Paris: Éditions du Cerf, 1946], 51; in the second edition [1984], Botte consid-
ers the last phrase an interpolation [87]; see also Pierre Nautin, “Je Crois à l’Esprit
Saint dans la Sainte Église pour la Résurrection de la Chair”: Étude sur l’Histoire et la
Théologie du Symbole, Unam Sanctam 17 [Paris: Éditions du Cerf, 1947]).
70. Hippolytus, Traditio Apostolica, c. 4 (La Tradition Apostolique, 33).
1. Martyrdom is a perfect union with Christ, a perfect following

of Christ. It is the perfect fulfillment of Christ’s command to leave
this world for Him. It follows Him perfectly and in all truth “out
of this world to the Father.”71 It is a perfect sacrifice of love, a
total giving of oneself as Christ gave Himself for us.
I would have you think of pleasing God—as indeed you

do—rather than men. For at no later time shall I have an op-
portunity like this of reaching God; nor can you ever have
any better deed ascribed to you—if only you remain silent. If
only you will say nothing in my behalf, I shall be a word of
God. But, if your love is for my body, I shall be once more a
mere voice. You can do me no greater kindness than to suf-
fer me to be sacrificed to God while the place of sacrifice is
still prepared. Thus forming yourselves into a chorus of love,
you may sing to the Father in Jesus Christ that God gave the
bishop of Syria the grace of being transferred from the rising
to the setting sun. It is good to set, leaving the world for God,
and so to rise in Him (taken from St. Ignatius to the Romans,
n. 2; Fathers of the Church, Apostolic Fathers, p. 108-972).
By martyrdom he becomes in the fullest sense a Christian, a real

Christian, a “word of God” and not merely a “voice.” “It is good
to set, leaving the world for God, and so to rise in Him” (death
and resurrection in Christ, in cosmic symbolism). In n. 3 he says
with the help of their prayers, his martyrdom will make him a
“Christian not only in name but in fact.”73 Why? because by mar-
tyrdom the power (of the Holy Spirit) is enabled to work in him,
substituting itself for his own power. “Christianity is not the work
of persuasion, but, wherever it is hated by the world it is a work
of power” (p. 109).74
71. John 13:1.

72. The Apostolic Fathers, trans. Francis X. Glimm, Joseph M.-F. Marique, sj,
Gerald G. Walsh, sj, The Fathers of the Church [FC], vol. 1 (New York: Christian
Heritage, 1947).
73. Apostolic Fathers, 109 (which reads “. . . not merely in name . . .”).
74. N. 3 (which reads “. . . whenever . . .”).
I am writing to all the Churches to tell them all that I am,

with all my heart, to die for God—if only you do not pre-
vent it. I beseech you not to indulge your benevolence at
the wrong time. Please let me be thrown to the wild beasts;
through them I can reach God. I am God’s wheat; I am
ground by the teeth of the wild beasts that I may end as
the pure bread of Christ. If anything, coax the beasts on
to become my sepulcher and to leave nothing of my body
undevoured so that, when I am dead, I may be no bother
to anyone. I shall be really a disciple of Jesus Christ if and
when the world can no longer see so much as my body.
Make petition, then, to the Lord for me, so that by these
means I may be made a sacrifice to God. I do not command
you, as Peter and Paul did. They were Apostles; I am a con-
demned man. They were free men; I am still a slave. Still, if
I suffer, I shall be emancipated by Jesus Christ and, in my
resurrection, shall be free. But now in chains I am learning
to have no wishes of my own (idem, n. 4).75
Note the eucharistic imagery.
I am already battling with beasts on my journey from Syria

to Rome. On land and at sea, by night and by day, I am
in chains with ten leopards around me—or at least with a
band of guards who grow more brutal the better they are
treated. However, the wrongs they do me make me a better
disciple. “But that is not where my justification lies.” May
I find my joy in the beasts that have been made ready for
me. My prayer is that they will be prompt in dealing with
me. I shall coax them to devour me without delay and not
be afraid to touch me, as has happened in some cases. And
if, when I am ready, they hold back, I shall provoke them
to attack me. Pardon me, but I know what is good for me. I
am now beginning to be a disciple; may nothing visible or
invisible prevent me from reaching Jesus Christ. Fire and
cross and battling with wild beasts [their clawing and tear-
ing], the breaking of bones and mangling of members, the
75. Apostolic Fathers, 109–10.

grinding of my whole body, the wicked torments of the

devil—let them all assail me, so long as I get to Jesus Christ
(idem, n. 5).76
Seeing that all things have an end, two things are proposed
to our choice—life and death; and each of us is to go to his
appropriate place. As there are two currencies, the one of
God, and the other of the world, each stamped in its own
way, so the unbelieving have the stamp of the world; those
who, in charity, believe have the stamp of God the Father
through Jesus Christ. And, unless it is our choice to die,
through Him, unto His passion, His life is not in us (Igna-
tius to {the} Magnesians; idem, n. 5; p. 97).
la. The Mystical Theology of St. Ignatius: {The} basic idea {is}
of the hidden, transcendent and silent Godhead, in Whom is all
reality, indeed Who is Himself the Real and the Father. As silence
is to speech, so the Father is to the Son. To hear and possess the si-
lence of the Father is the real objective of reception of the Word.
“Whoever truly possesses the Word of Jesus can also hear His
silence, that he may be perfect, that through his speaking he may
act and through his silence be known” (Ephesians, 15).77 Christian
perfection (he does not yet say gnosis) is penetration into this si-
lence and this reality of the Word in the Father. He who penetrates
to the inner silence of God can himself become a word of God—
and Ignatius must himself be a “word” in his martyrdom. He
who fails to be a “word” remains only a “voice”—incomplete.
But the Romans must “be silent” if Ignatius is to be a word. Here
we come upon the profound idea of God present as “silence”
within the Church—the silence of the bishops. From this silence
76. Apostolic Fathers, 110.

77. This translation is not that found in Apostolic Fathers, 93; it is appar-
ently a modernized version of the translation found in J. B. Lightfoot, ed. and
trans., The Apostolic Fathers, 2nd ed. (London: Macmillan, 1889), II.2.548: “He that
truly possesseth the word of Jesus is able also to hearken unto His silence, that
he may be perfect; that through his speech he may act and through his silence
he may be known.”
God speaks in the testimony of Christians. For Ignatius, martyr-

dom must be understood in relation to this mysticism of silence
and presence. Note: not only martyrdom is a manifestation of God
in us, but even our simplest everyday acts are produced by Christ
living in us. “Carnal men can no more do the works of the spirit
than those who walk in the spirit can do the things of the flesh;
nor can faith do the things of infidelity nor infidelity the things
of faith. Since you do all things in Jesus Christ, even those things
are spiritual which you do according to the flesh” (to {the} Ephe-
sians, n. 8; p. 90).78
2. Martyrdom is a gift of God—it must not be sought delib-
erately by our own will (see Martyrdom of Polycarp, c. 4; Fathers
of {the} Church, Apostolic Fathers, p. 15379). But it should be ac-
cepted with humility and joy when God offers it as a great gift.
3. Asceticism is a preparation for martyrdom. It is to be seen
in explicit reference to the possibility of martyrdom. This includes
the acceptance of providential sufferings. Ignatius suffers already
from the “beasts” (his guards) on the boat to Italy.
4. Tertullian,80 with characteristic exaggeration, thought that
only martyrs could be united immediately to God after death.
However, all agree martyrdom brings man direct to God.
5. Martyrdom is a second baptism. It is the perfect fulfillment
of our baptismal vocation. In baptism we die to the world and rise
in Christ sacramentally. In martyrdom we do so in all truth. St.
Cyprian says: martyrdom is a baptism “in which the angels baptize,
in which God and His Christ exult, a baptism after which there is
no more sin, a baptism which consummates the progress of our
faith, which unites us to God as soon as we have left the world. In
the baptism of water we receive the remission of sin, in the baptism
78. This reads “. . . spirit do the things . . .”

79. This chapter mentions one who “had forced himself and some oth-
ers to come forward voluntarily” and then apostasized; it concludes, “For this
reason, therefore, brethren, we do not approve those who give themselves up,
because the Gospel does not teach us this.”
80. See Histoire de Spiritualité, vol. 1, 258, n. 58; ET: 208, n. 58.
of blood the crown of virtues” (Ad Fortunatum).81 Note: in this text

we do not of course yet have the “three ways,” but here purification
is the beginning, the whole life of virtue is the illuminative life, and
we reach “union” in martyrdom, the crown and fulfillment of the
ascetic life, the supreme mysticism. {There is here} at least an ad-
umbration of the three ways, culminating in union.
5{a}. Martyrdom is the crown of the eucharistic life. We have
already seen the famous reference, the eucharistic implications
of Ignatius’ “I am the wheat of Christ.” Origen refers to martyr-
dom as the “supreme eucharist”82—the perfect thanksgiving of
the Christian. {Here are} implications that the eucharistic life,
together with the ascetic life of virtue, points directly to martyr-
dom. The eucharist is the food of martyrs as it will also be the bread
of virgins. N.B. Secret of the Mass of mid-Lent: “The sacrifice
from which all martyrdom took its beginning.”83
6. In all these texts we have seen suggestions of a relationship
between the martyr and the monk. With the end of the persecu-
tions, the monk will take over the ascetic life of the martyr. His
ascetic life will be the substitute for martyrdom. Mystical Union
(expressed first of all as gnosis) will bring him to see God at the
summit of the ascetic life as the martyr saw Christ on leaving the
body. St. Ephrem (fourth century) speaks especially of monastic
vigils as a martyrdom. “The martyrs gave witness during the day,
the ascetics bear witness during their vigils. . . . Crucify your
body all night long in prayer. . . . If you do not yield to sleep,
count yourself among the martyrs. Be a martyr in vigils and
may this martyrdom be a matter between you and God alone”
(Exhortatio ad Monachos, 584). Afflictions, macerations, fasts, etc.
81. PL 4, col. 654AB; quoted in Histoire de Spiritualité, vol. 1, 258; ET: 208.
82. Histoire de Spiritualité, vol. 1, 259; ET: 208.
83. See the Secret of the Mass for Thursday of the third week of Lent: “. . .
sacrificium . . . de quo martyrium sumpsit omne principium” (Missale Romanum ex
Decreto Sacrosancti Concilii Tridentini Restitutum [New York: Benziger, 1944], 104).
84. Quoted in Gustave Bardy, “Dépouillement,” DS 3, col. 461, from
Ephraem Syri Hymni et Sermones, 4 vols., ed. T. J. Lamy (Malines: H. Dessain,
make the monk equal to the martyrs. (Note the Syrian emphasis
on corporal penance.)
Summary on Martyrdom:
a) The tradition of the martyrs makes it clear that to attain
to perfect union with God, a “death” of the self is necessary.
b) How does one die to self? The martyr’s case is unambigu-
ous. His exterior, bodily self is destroyed in a real death, and his
inner self lives in Christ, raised up with Christ.
c) The ascetic and mystical death to self must in some sense
reproduce what is most essential in the martyr’s death. Actual
dissolution of the union of body and soul is not of the “essence”
of this death of the self, but complete liberation from bodily de-
sires seems to be so.
d) We must bear in mind the question of the “death of the
self” as we proceed in this course. It will be interpreted variously
down the ages (v.g. the mystic death in the Dark Night of St. John
{of the} Cross, the stigmatization of St. Francis, etc.). Clement of
Alexandria speaks of a “gnostic martyrdom.”85 The ecstatic char-
acter of Christian mysticism is already adumbrated in Clement.
This ecstatic character is most important and must never be un-
derestimated. However, this does not imply an “alienation of the
senses” or a psycho-physical (violent) experience. Clement of
Alexandria already speaks of the ascetic life as a martyrdom.
“Whosoever leaves father and mother etc. . . . that man is
blessed because he realizes not the ordinary martyrdom but the
gnostic martyrdom, living according to the Rule of the Gospel out
of love for our Savior. For gnosis is the understanding of the
name and the knowledge of the Gospel”86 (Stromata, IV:4).
This brings us to the theme of Christian Gnosis.
1886–1902), 4.214-16; the first sentence quoted here actually follows the rest of
the passage. (This text is actually apocryphal, according to Dom Edmund Beck,
osb, in “Ascetisme et Monachisme chez Saint Ephrem,” L’Orient Syrien, 3 [1958],
273–98.)
B. Gnosis. There is no explicit doctrine about a properly so-

called contemplative life in the Gospels. We have seen above that
all is included in our life in Christ, our life in the Church, the
sacramental life of charity which culminates in the knowledge
of Christ through the Spirit, and the return to the Father. But the
Alexandrians, uniting Hellenistic philosophy with the Gospel in
a living and highly valuable synthesis, began to look at the Chris-
tian knowledge of God in the light of a “contemplative summit”
of Christian experience and “philosophy.” This was not a perver-
sion of Christian truth—it threw new light on the full meaning
of the Christian life in the Spirit.
Revaluation of Christian Gnosis: Bouyer (Histoire de la Spiritu-
alité Chrétienne, vol. 1) protests against the accusations of syncre-
tism that have been levelled against Clement and Irenaeus for
the last two hundred years.87 The term gnostic has itself been in
bad favor since the nineteenth-century critics attached it to the
Gnostic heretics. But the term belonged originally to the orthodox
gnostics, the Christians. Irenaeus always defends the Christian
as the genuine gnostic; the heretics are always pseudo-gnostics.
Hence the Gnostic heresy has no real right to the name of gnostic,
which ought to be restored to its proper place in the history of
theology. St. Justin, martyr and philosopher, initiated the Chris-
tian gnosis (i.e. philosophy), a rational and also contemplative
understanding of the Gospel message, with a view to communi-
cating it to the pagan intellectual. St. Irenaeus ({a} Syrian who
became bishop of Lyons) reacted against the Gnostic heresy as
anti-biblical, anti-ecclesiastical {and} anti-humanistic.
Characteristics of the pseudo-gnostics: the Gnostic heresy is
predominantly a mixture of Jewish, hellenistic and oriental ele-
ments superimposed on Christianity. The Christian elements
remain superficial. {The} Gnostic system rejects the Biblical cos-
mogony and replaces it with the pseudo-scientific concepts of
87. Bouyer says one hundred years, and does not mention Irenaeus (His-
toire de Spiritualité, vol. 1, 262; ET: 211).
the day. Christ stands at the summit of a mystical ascent through

aeons, angelic realms.
Dualism: {the} God of the Old Testament {is presented as the}
enemy of Christ. The body is evil—{it} is a tomb of the soul (soma
sema88). Hence the doctrine of the Incarnation is rejected. The vis-
ible universe comes from an evil principle, etc. Note the impor-
tant implications of all this for the ascetic life. {It is a} distortion
of true Christian asceticism. False mysticism inevitably results,
{marked by} hatred of the flesh {and} illuminism. The Gnostics
insisted that only gnostic illumination really saved. Hence only a
minority, an elite, is really saved. This minority is initiated into
special mysteries inaccessible to the ordinary faithful. The initiates
are the true gnostics. The effect of their gnosis is a rescue from mat-
ter and an escape into the realm of pure spirit. This kind of solution
to the problems of the spiritual life will remain a constant tempta-
tion all through Christian history. We find various forms of it
constantly recurring.
The reaction of St. Irenaeus—Adversus Haereses:
a) He opposes to the esoteric tradition of the gnostic, the
public tradition of the Church. True Christian gnosis is enlighten-
ment by the Holy Ghost present in the Christian community, the
body of Christ. In the midst of the Church the Spirit is perma-
nently a “pledge of incorruptibility and a confirmation of our
faith.”89 Note {the} emphasis on incorruptibility, i.e. resurrection,
as opposed to liberation from the flesh. Above all Irenaeus de-
fends the unity of the Scriptures against the pseudo-gnostics. True
Christian gnosis is arrived at precisely by a grasp of the unity of
God’s revelation, culminating in the recapitulation of all in Christ.
Without this understanding, man remains in illusion, and does
not yield himself to the Holy Spirit.
88. “the body [is] a tomb” (Histoire de Spiritualité, vol. 1, 267; ET: 215).
89. Adversus Haereses, III.24.1 (J. P. Migne, ed., Patrologiae Cursus Completus,
Series Graeca [PG], 161 vols. [Paris: Garnier, 1857–1866], vol. 7, col. 966B), quoted
in Histoire de Spiritualité, vol. 1, 280; ET: 227 (where it it cited as III.38.1).
b) Recapitulation of all in Christ: as opposed to the Gnostic

pleroma, {Irenaeus presents} the idea of Christ as Pleroma as al-
ready developed by St. Paul. Existence in the image and likeness
of God is restored to the Christian in Christ. {Note the} impor-
tance of this doctrine of image and likeness in Christian mysti-
cism: we shall meet it again.
c) Trinitarian mysticism: those who have in themselves the
Spirit of God are brought to the Logos, the Son, Who takes them
and offers them to the Father. From the Father they receive
incorruptibility.
d) Incarnation and Redemption in Irenaeus: in opposing the
pseudo-gnostics he places great emphasis on the Incarnation.
Human nature being assumed by the Word, man becomes ca-
pable of divinization. “God became man in order that man might
become God.”90 This dictum will be taken up by St. Athanasius,91
etc. St. Basil will even say, “Man is a creature who has received
orders to become God.”92 Incarnation and divinization henceforth
are closely associated in the Fathers. Objections: Harnack has
objected93 that this emphasis on the Incarnation makes it auto-
matically redemptive and therefore the Cross has no more im-
portance. This is false—clearly Christ by His obedience, His
redemptive death on the Cross, liberates man from sin and re-
stores in him the divine life, if man himself will take up his own
90. See Contra Haereses, Book 5, Preface: “qui propter immensam suam di-
lectionem factus est quod sumus nos, uti nos perficeret esse quod est ipse” (“Who,
because of his measureless love, became what we are in order to enable us to be
what He is”) (PG 7, col. 1120B); and Contra Haereses, III.19.1: “Propter hoc enim
Verbum Dei homo; et qui Filius Dei est, filius hominis factus est, commistus Verbo Dei,
ut adoptionem percipiens fiat Filius Dei” (“For this reason the Word of God became
human, and he who was the Son of God became the Son of Man, so that, united
with the Word of God man might become by adoption the Son of God”) (PG 7,
col. 939B).
91. De Incarnatione, 54 (PG 25, col. 192B).
92. St. Gregory Nazianzen, Oratio 43: In Laudem Basilli Magni, 48 (PG 36,
col. 560A), quoted in Lossky, Mystical Theology, 124.
93. See Histoire de Spiritualité, vol. 1, 284–85; ET: 230–31.
cross and imitate the obedience of his Master—especially in

martyrdom.
Conclusions: gnostic is never a term of reproach for Irenaeus.
Nor is it a term for {an} esoteric elite. All {the} faithful can and
should be gnostics. However there are varying degrees of perfec-
tion. Gnosis, {the} study of Scripture and contemplation of its
mysteries, shows Christ at the center of all history, and {focuses
on} recapitulation, {the} summing up of all in {the} power of the
divine mercy uniting all to God in Him. This is {the} gnosis-mysti-
cism of Irenaeus.
Clement of Alexandria the gnostic: time does not permit an
extended study of the very important Alexandrian School. For
Origen, see our notes on Cassian and the Fathers.94 But it is neces-
sary to refer at least in passing to Clement’s idea of the “true”
(Christian) gnostic, especially as we shall meet this again, where
Clement influences Fénelon in the seventeenth century. There are
certain very positive elements of great importance in Clement:
1) His characteristic use of non-Christian philosophy, as con-
tributing to Christian gnosis. {See} Stromata VI:9:95 just as the Jews
received the Law, the pagans received philosophy from God. This
equation of the philosophy of Plato with the Law of Moses, of
Socrates as an obscure precursor of Christ, gives the gnosis of
Clement a strongly philosophical cast. This was dictated to some
extent by the mission of the school of Alexandria where pagans
came to be instructed along with Christians.
2) However, though gnosis implies a broad living synthesis
of philosophy, Judaism, and revelation, it is not mere human
94. Cassian and the Fathers, 23-29.

95. While he begins to touch on this topic at the end of chapter 9, the
following chapter (PG 9, cols. 299/300D-303/304C), entitled “Gnosticum verum
etiam scientiarum humanarum cognitionem sibi comparaturum tanquam fidei adjutri-
cum atque ad res divinas percipiendas animum praeparantium” (“The true gnostic
unites in himself the understanding of human sciences along with the assistance
of faith in order to prepare the mind to grasp divine realities”) focuses particu-
larly on the contributions of pagan learning to Christian gnosis.
syncretism. Over and above intellectual effort and study, gnosis

is a gift of God, in fact the gift of God par excellence. He defines
gnosis as a “certain divine knowledge . . . born from obedience
to the precepts, . . . which teaches man to enter into the posses-
sion of God” (Stromata III:5).96 Gnosis is a seeking for God: “To seek
the Face of God by all possible means.”97 It comes to us “from the
Father by the Son.”98
3) The gnostic is therefore called to know God, to possess
God, to see God. This is not merely intellectuality: it is a spiritual
gift, a mystical vision. (The term mystical is not yet used,99 but it
should be clear that gnosticism equals mystical contemplation
for Clement. However, it is still debatable.)
4) The gnostic ascent to the gift of divine vision is also an
ascent to divinization through purification. By constant prayer the
gnostic leads an “angelic life.”100 He is liberated from the passions
and from the flesh and “purified by light.”101 There is a negative
emphasis on the body (cf. Platonism). “The gnostic soul must be
freed from its bodily wrapping. . . . Carnal desires must be got
rid of; the soul must be purified by light . . . but most men put
on their mortal element as snails put on their shells, and roll up
in their passions like hedgehogs” (Stromata V).102
96. PG 8, col. 1148BC, quoted in Joseph Moingt, “Écriture Sainte et Vie

Spirituelle,” II.A.7: “Clément d’Alexandrie,” DS 4, col. 146.
97. Stromata, VI.10.81 (PG 9, col. 301C), quoted in Moingt, col. 146.
98. Stromata, V.11 (PG 9, col. 109B), quoted in Histoire de Spiritualité, vol.
1, 327; ET: 266.
99. But cf. Stromata, VII.10.57 (PG 9, col. 480C), quoted in Jules Lebreton,
“Clément d’Alexandrie,” DS 2, col. 961, which refers to “mystical stages” (ta;~
prokopa;~ ta;~ mustika;~).
100. See Stromata, IV.25.155, VII.10.57, VII.14.84 (PG 8, col. 1365A, PG 9,
cols. 481B, 517A).
101. Stromata, V.11.67 (PG 9, col. 104A), quoted in Bardy, “Dépouillement,”
col. 460.
102. Stromata, V.11.67-68 (PG 9, col. 104A), quoted in Bardy, “Dépouille-
ment,” col. 460.
5) However the ascesis of the gnostic is built, above all, on

faith, hope and charity. Gnosis is associated with the perfection
of charity. It enters into the mystery of the divine agape. {The
gnostic} is united with Him in the mystery of His love. Gnosis is
primarily a unified view of the whole mystery of salvation as
expressed in Scripture but also as experienced in the loving union
of the gnostic with the divine light.
6) Reading of the Scriptures is hence the royal road to gnosis.
The Scriptures are God’s way of educating man for Sonship.
Those who have meditated on the Scriptures become “Theodi-
dacts.”103 Through the Scriptures we are drawn by the Spirit to
the Father, through the Son. This implies first of all the spiritual
understanding of what is veiled by the letter of Scripture. “As the
sea belongs to all but one swims in it, one sails on it for business,
one fishes in it; and as the earth belongs to all but one voyages
on it, one ploughs it and one hunts on it, another builds on it or
mines it, so Scripture—one draws forth from it simple faith, one
bases his conduct upon it, and one finally gains from it the
fullness of religion and attains to gnosis.”104
7) The perfect gnostic must unite in himself three essential
elements:
(1) fulfillment of all the precepts;
(2) theoria, contemplation ({a} unified grasp of {the} agape-
mystery);
(3) the instruction of others.
Note this arrangement, which will become traditional. It is not
yet the same idea as we find in St. Thomas105 but it is on the way
to it, and obviously from the same Hellenic sources.
103. “those taught by God” (Stromata, I.20.98-99 [PG 8, col. 816B], quoted
in Moingt, col. 146; cf. I Thess. 4:9).
104. Eclogae Propheticae, 28 (PG 9, col. 713A), quoted in Histoire de Spiritu-
alité, vol. 1, 329-30; ET: 269.
105. The reference is evidently to the three traditional categories of the
spiritual life, popularly associated with Aquinas, as Merton has already done
in the Epilogue to The Seven Storey Mountain: “Practically anyone who realizes
8) Clement describes the summit of the gnostic life in very

strong terms (Stromata VII:57): gnosis, after purification, leads
the existence of the debate can tell you that Saint Thomas taught that there were
three vocations: that to the active life, that to the contemplative, and a third to
the mixture of both, and that this last is superior to the other two. The mixed
life is, of course, the vocation of Saint Thomas’s own order, the Friars Preach-
ers” (Thomas Merton, The Seven Storey Mountain [New York: Harcourt, Brace,
1948], 414); Merton goes on to point out that Thomas sees the contemplative life
as superior to the active, and “proves it by natural reason in arguments from a
pagan philosopher—Aristotle” (414) and to look at the three lives as successive
phases of spiritual development: “First comes the active life (practice of vir-
tues, mortification, charity) which prepares us for contemplation. Contempla-
tion means rest, suspension of activity, withdrawal into the mysterious interior
solitude in which the soul is absorbed in the immense and fruitful silence of
God and learns something of the secret of His perfections less by seeing than
by fruitive love. Yet to stop there would be to fall short of perfection. According
to Saint Bernard of Clairvaux it is the comparatively weak soul that arrives at
contemplation but does not overflow with a love that must communicate what
it knows of God to other men. . . . With this in mind, Saint Thomas could not
fail to give the highest place to a vocation which, in his eyes, seemed destined
to lead men to such a height of contemplation that the soul must overflow and
communicate its secrets to the world” (415). Saint Thomas discusses the active
and contemplative lives in the Summa Theologiae, 2a 2ae, q. 179–82, where he
does support, with various qualifications, the traditional position of the superi-
ority of the contemplative life (Summa Theologiae, ed. Thomas Gilby, op, et al., 61
vols. [New York: McGraw-Hill, 1964–80], vol. 46); but Aquinas does not look at
the categories of the spiritual life as successive phases, and in art. 2 of q. 179 he
explicitly excludes the idea of a third level—the so-called mixed life (6/7-10/11).
It is in a later quaestio, on whether a religious order dedicated to the contempla-
tive life is superior to one devoted to the active life (2a 2ae, q. 188, art. 6), that he
maintains that an order that shares the fruits of its contemplation is the best: “Et
hoc praefertur simplici contemplationi. Sicut enim majus est illuminare quam lucere
solum, ita majus est contemplata aliis tradere quam solum contemplari” (“And this is
preferred to simple contemplation, for just as it is better to illumine than merely
to shine, so it is better to give to others the things contemplated than simply to
contemplate”) (Summa Theologiae, 47: 204/205). The phrase “contemplata tradere”
thus becomes associated with the “mixed life” even though Thomas himself
had not endorsed this category. (Merton himself used “Contemplata Tradere”
as the title for the second last chapter of Seeds of Contemplation [New York: New
Directions, 1949], 182; in New Seeds of Contemplation [New York: New Directions,
man into the divine nature.106 “The Son of Man became Man
in order that you might learn how man becomes God.”107 The
“intimate light” of gnosis leads to a “summit of repose.”108 This
light is so positive that Clement even speaks of contemplating
God face to face (even in this present life)—probably not in the
strict sense in which this would be used only of vision in heaven.
It is “sure knowledge and apprehension.”109 Here he is stressing
the positive side of a mystical experience that will also be put in
more negative terms (including by Clement himself). He is not
expressing, probably, a different kind of experience, differing in es-
sence. He sees a different modality of the one experience. “The
perfection of the gnostic soul is to go beyond all purification and
all liturgy and be with the Lord there where he is immediately
under Him.”110 This is important: mysticism is an ascent beyond
the acts of an exterior life, however holy. It is implicitly an ecstasis.
Note this is something quite different from saying that liturgy,
etc. are not to be used as means in the spiritual life, that they are
imperfect means. They are simply not the end. However note that
this very positive expression of the vision of God in contempla-
tion will be taken up later by other mystics—for instance Richard
of St. Victor: in the Benjamin Major (PL 196), he speaks of seeing
God, “quasi facie ad faciem intuetur, Deum qui per mentis excessum
extra seipsum ductus, summae sapientiae lumen sine ullo involucro,
1961], 268, the title is replaced by the English translation “Sharing the Fruits of
Contemplation”). A helpful discussion of the issue of the active and contempla-
tive lives in Aquinas is provided by Simon Tugwell, op in the introduction to
his translations from Aquinas in Albert and Thomas: Selected Writings (New York:
Paulist Press, 1988), 279–86, 290, in which the relevant texts are also found: 2a
2ae, q. 179–82 (534–85); q. 188, art. 6 (628–32).
106. PG 9, col. 480C.
107. Protrepticus, 1.8 (PG 8, col. 65A), quoted in Histoire de Spiritualité, vol.
1, 334; ET: 273, and Irénée Dalmais, “Divinisation: II. Patristique Grecque,” DS
3, col. 1378.
108. Stromata, VII.10.57 (PG 9, col. 480C), quoted in Lebreton, col. 961.
109. Stromata, VII.10.57 (PG 9, col. 481A), quoted in Lebreton, col. 961.
110. Stromata, VII.10.57 (PG 9, col. 481A), quoted in Lebreton, col. 961.
figurarumque adumbratione, denique non in speculo et aenigmate, sed

simplici, ut ita dicam, veritate contemplatur.”111 This is a very strong
statement.
10) Finally Clement, in a distinction that would hardly make
him popular with present-day theologians, seems to echo the
Gnostic idea of a separation between the ordinary faithful and the
perfect. The simple faithful do not have gnosis. The gnostic does
form part of an elite who have access to a hidden knowledge.
Note: Dom Leclercq shows how monastic theology and especially
Cistercian theology, nourished by experience, is truly a gnosis in
the best sense of the word (see {The Love} of Learning and {the
Desire for} God,112 pp. 266,113 269,114 271 ff.,115 especially p. 275, 280).
111. Col. 147AB, which reads “. . . intuetur, qui . . . semetipsum . . . sine ali
quo . . . figurarumve . . . non per speculum et in aenigmate, sed in simplici, ut sic dicam,
. . .”: “He looks upon God face-to-face, as it were, who is led beyond himself in
ecstasy and contemplates the light of supreme wisdom without any veil, without
any semblance of forms, not in a mirror, darkly, but, as I say, in simple truth.”
112. Merton has written Desire of Learning and Love of God.
113. “On the whole, the monastic approach to theology, the kind of reli-
gious understanding the monks are trying to attain, might better be described by
reviving the word gnosis—on condition naturally that no heterodox nuance be
given it. The Christian gnosis, the ‘true gnosis’ in its original, fundamental and or-
thodox meaning is that kind of higher knowledge which is the complement, the
fruition of faith and which reaches completion in prayer and contemplation.”
114. “To speak of gnosis and to differentiate between two knowledges
or two degrees in the understanding of faith by no means implies echoing the
difference which certain gnostics of antiquity or certain heretics of the twelfth
century found between the simple believers—credentes—and the ‘perfect’ who
receive a different teaching: this meant in those times a secret esoteric doctrine
reserved for the initiate. The monastic theologians are speaking of two different
ways of knowing the same mysteries.”
115. These pages focus on “Theology and Contemplation” (271–77) and
“A Spiritual Theology” (277–81); Leclercq wrote on page 275 of self-knowledge
and the knowledge of God as the two complementary and correlative aspects of
monastic theology and on the influence of Augustine’s theory of divine illumi-
nation of the Word on monastic writers; he quotes M.-D. Chenu on page 280 on
the elevation of wisdom over detached objective learning as a characteristic of
monastic theology that makes it of permanent value.
“Monastic theology is a theology of admiration and therefore greater

than a theology of speculation” (p. 283).
IV. Divinization and Mysticism

We will consider three aspects of this question, especially in
the Cappadocian Fathers: A. Divinization; B. Mysticism; C. The
Spiritual Senses.
A. Theosis—Deificatio—Divinization. First of all it must be
quite clear that the idea of divinization is to a great extent ex-
pressed in terms resembling those used by ancient Greek phi-
losophy, and also by the neo-Platonists, contemporary with
Clement and Origen. It is a term of which modern theologians
are afraid, because of pantheistic implications. Paul in Acts 17:28
{says,} “we are God’s offspring,” quoting Epimenides and Ara-
tus.116 Read {the} speech at the Areopagus—Paul’s appeal to Hel-
lenic wisdom. For Plato, man had to recover his likeness to God
by an ascent to contemplation of eternal ideas, purifying himself
of the sensible, especially intellectually. For Plotinus, man is by
nature rooted in God, or rather the soul is by nature divine, and
must recover its lost identity by purification. For Paul, resurrection
must fulfill the vocation of all as sons of God. The idea of divin-
ization is not baldly expressed in Scripture in that term, but there
are many scriptural themes that are used by the Fathers, and it
is evident that the center of the Christian mystery as we have
seen it in St. John and St. Paul is the transformation of man in
Christ, indeed the recapitulation of all in Christ.
Some basic scriptural themes on divinization {include}:117
a) Man {is} made in the image and likeness of God (Gen.
1:26-27).
b) Our divine adoption (Gal. 3:26; 4:5); participation in {the}
divine nature (2 Pet. 1:4).
116. See Dalmais, col. 1376 (which mentions Aratus but not Epimenides).
117. See Dalmais, col. 1376.
c) We are called to be perfect as the Father is perfect, {in}

Godlike charity (Matt. 5:44 f.).
d) {The} vision of God makes us like unto God (1 Cor. 13:12;
1 John 3:2).
e) We shall participate in the resurrection and enjoy incor-
ruptibility (1 Cor. 15:52).
Hence Clement can say that gnosis is divinization. For Clement,
divinization (which he treats in the light of Platonism and of the
Greek mystery cults) is the summit of a divine pedagogy: from
philosophy to faith, from faith to gnosis, from gnosis to {a} union
of love. Clement already points to something beyond gnosis—a
union with God as friend to friend.118 It is the restoration of the
divine image in us, in the likeness of Christ. Hence it is more than
mere speculation. “Christ by a heavenly doctrine divinizes man”
(Prot. 11).119 {According to} Origen: “Mind is divinized by what
it contemplates” (en ois theorei theopoietai).120 Origen also brings
our divinization into {a} closer relationship with the Incarnation.
“The human and divine natures were united [in Christ] in order
that by communion with what is divine, human nature might become
divine, not only in Jesus but in all those who, by faith, embrace
the life that Jesus has taught and which leads to friendship and
community with God” (Contra Celsum 3:28, quoted in DS,
III:1379121). A wonderful text of Hippolytus is quoted by Bouyer
(Hist. Spir. 1, p. 498122):
Thou who living on this earth hast known the heavenly

King, thou shalt be the familiar friend of that God, and the
co-heir of Christ, being no longer submitted to passions
or to sicknesses. For thou shalt have become God. All the
trials thou hast endured, being man, God has sent them to
118. Stromata, VII.10 (PG 9, col. 481A), quoted in Dalmais, col. 1378.
119. Quoted in Dalmais, col. 1378.
120. In Joannem, 32.17 (PG 14, col. 817A), quoted in Dalmais, col. 1379.
121. PG 11, col. 956D.
122. ET: 417–18.
thee because thou art man. But on the other hand, all the
goods that are natural to God, God has promised to give
them to thee when thou hast been begotten to immortality
and deified. In obeying His holy precepts, in making thy-
self good by imitation of His goodness, thou shalt be like
unto Him and honored by Him. For God is not poor, He
who has made thee also a god in view of His glory.123
St. Athanasius is at the same time the great doctor of diviniza-

tion and the defender of the divinity of the Word against the
Arians. This fact is very significant. The mysticism and the dog-
matic theology of the Church are inseparably united in Athana-
sius, to such a point that they stand and fall together by the single
argument of man’s divinization by the Incarnation of Christ. One
might also say that the emphasis of St. Athanasius is so strong
that it almost constitutes an exaggeration and that one must re-
member that what he says about the Incarnation must not make
us forget the prime importance of the Cross and the Redemption
of man. Some important texts (taken from {the} interesting com-
mentary on the treatise of Athanasius, De Incarnatione Verbi, In-
troduction, Sources Chrétiennes, p.92 ff.124). Divinization is the
result of the Incarnation; more, it is the very purpose of the Incar-
nation. “God gave the Word a body in order that in Him we might
be renewed and divinized” (Ad Adelph. 4).125 (Note: already in
Ignatius of Antioch, v.g. Romans 2, there are implications of di-
vinization.126) “It is for us that the Word assumed a body, in order
that in Him we might be renewed and divinized. . . . The Son
123. Philosophoumena, X.34 (the very end of his work Against Heresies) (PG
16, col. 3454BC—published as a work of Origen).
124. Athanase d’Alexandrie, Contre les Païens et Sur l’Incarnation du Verbe,
ed. and trans. T. Camelot, op, SC 18 (Paris: Éditions du Cerf, 1947).
125. Contra Arianos, 2.47 (PG 26, col. 248B), quoted in Athanase, Contre les
Païens, 93, n. 1. (Merton has misread the citation, which is somewhat unclear.)
126. See the final sentence of this chapter: “It is good to set, leaving the
world for God, and so to rise in Him” (Apostolic Fathers, 109); see Dalmais, col.
1376, for other passages relating to divinization in Ignatius.
of God made Himself man in order to divinize us in Himself. . . .

We do not participate in the body of an ordinary man but we re-
ceive the body of the Word and in Him we are divinized” (Contra
Arianos 2).127 “Man could not have been divinized by union with
a simple creature, if the Son of God were not true God. . . . We
would not have been delivered from sin and from malediction,
if the flesh taken on by the Son of God were not by nature human
flesh. . . . So too man would never have been divinized if the
Word Who made Himself flesh was not by nature from the Father
and His own true Word. Such a union was effected in order to
unite to Him who by nature belongs to the divinity, him who is
by nature man, in order that his salvation and divinization might be
assured” (Contra Arianos 2).128
Note: the effectiveness of this argument of St. Athanasius
depends on the fact that divinization and salvation are regarded as
one and the same thing. It is our destiny to be united to God in
the One Son of God. We are called to “be sons of God in Christ.”129
Divinization is our last end. This is the vocation of all Christians,
not simply of a special elite. There must have been a fundamental
agreement between Athanasius and the Arians—in other words
both parties, while being divided on the question of the divinity
of the Word, must have been agreed on the fact that divinization
was the last end of the Christian. Divinization means immortality,
the vision of God, the restoration of our lost likeness to God, and
all these mean a sharing in the divine life. Further, “the Word made
Himself visible in His body in order that we might come to know
the Invisible Father” (De Incarn. 54; see below).130 Thus the Lord
127. The three sentences (translated from Athanase, Contre les Païens, 93)
are actually from three different sources: Contra Arianos, 2.47 (PG 26, col. 248B);
Ad Adelphium, 4 (PG 26, col. 1077A); Ad Maximum, 2 (PG 26, col. 1088B).
128. Contra Arianos, 2.70; PG 26, col. 296AB (Athanase, Contre les Païens,
93–94); the text reads “by the Word . . . ” rather than “by the Son of God . . . ”
129. Contra Arianos, 3.19 (PG 26, cols. 361C-364A), quoted in Dalmais, col.
1381 (somewhat condensed).
130. PG 25, col. 192B, quoted in Dalmais, cols. 1380–81.
gives us supernatural and gratuitous knowledge of the Father. The

Father is revealed to us in the Son even in this present life, in
order that through the Son we may come to the Father and be divinized.
Furthermore, the doctrine of the mystical body is clear in Athana-
sius. We are divinized as members of Christ. In the De Incarna-
tione, Athanasius tells us to consider the works of Christ and
recognize that they are divine, to realize that by His death (Atha-
nasius by no means ignores the redemptive death of Christ) He
has given us immortality, and that He has become the choregos131
in the great work of divine providence. (Note {the} implicit com-
parison of the economy of redemption to a dance.) Then St. Atha-
nasius sums up his whole doctrine: “He became man in order
that we might become God. He made Himself visible in His
body in order that we might have an idea of the invisible
Father. He underwent outrages from men in order that we
might have part in immortality” (De Incarn. 54).132 This gives
the complete picture. St. Athanasius is not explicitly concerned
with what we would call mystical experience, but his doctrine is
the theological foundation for all such experience.
Note St. Athanasius renews all the same arguments in order
to prove the divinity of the Holy Spirit. “If this participation in
the Holy Spirit communicates to us the divine nature it would be
madness to say that the Spirit is of a created nature and not of the
divine nature. That is why those in whom He is present are divinized”
(Letters to Serapion).133 This makes it quite clear that our diviniza-
tion is already a reality, and yet in some sense it is to be progres-
sively unfolded and deepened until it reaches an ultimate
perfection in heaven. St. Basil takes this up even more clearly (see
DS III:1382): “The Paraclete like the sunlight taking possession of
a very clear and pure eye will show you in Himself the image of
the Invisible; in the blessed contemplation of the image you will
131. “chorus leader,” “producer”—a term taken from Greek drama.

132. PG 25, col. 192BC (Athanase, Contre les Païens, 90).
133. Letters to Serapion, 1.24 (PG 26, col. 585C), quoted in Dalmais, col.
1381.
see the inexpressible beauty of the archetype. . . . It is from this

that everything flows: foretelling of the future, understanding of
mysteries, comprehension of hidden things, distribution of char-
isms, participation in the life of heaven, singing and dancing in
choir with the angels, unending joy, permanent dwelling in God
and likeness to God, and finally, the supreme object of desire, to
become God” (from De Spiritu Sancto).134 Here we have the mystical
life not so much included in divinization as leading up to the full
flowering and manifestation of the divine life in us, which has
begun with the granting of the Holy Spirit at baptism.
A note: in the Fathers as well as in the Bible and ancient reli-
gions generally, the idea of divinization is connected with that of
sacrifice. The victim accepted by God becomes “His” and therefore
divine, and those who partook of it communed with God (n.b.
Leclercq, p. 271).135 The Christian who opens himself totally to
God is “divinized”—i.e. is accepted and becomes God’s posses-
sion, and is filled with glory and the Holy Spirit (cf. John 17:1, 19
etc.; cf. {the} use of the word teleivwsi~—especially in Hebrews136).
The sacrifices of the New Law are truly consummated. In the New
Law, our sacrifices are consummated in and with the sacrifice of
Christ, and we ourselves become τελειοι—consummate—perfect.
This consummation is not mere moral perfection but the trans-
formation of the whole man in the glory of the Resurrection.
A note: divinization in the Cistercian Fathers. St. Bernard is in
the great tradition—this must be mentioned at least in passing.
134. De Spiritu Sancto, 9.23 (PG 32, col. 109BC).

135. Here Leclercq points out the correspondence in the development of
monastic theology between the “objective” dimension of the mystery of salva-
tion “as related by Holy Scripture and as it is lived in the liturgy,” and the “sub-
jective” dimension of appropriating this salvific action in one’s own spiritual
life, “which interiorizes the mystery in the soul of each of the faithful.”
136. See Heb. 7:11: “If then perfection [teleivwsi~] was by the Levitical
priesthood (for under it the people received the Law), what further need was
there that another priest should rise, according to the order of Melchizedek, and
said not to be according to the order of Aaron?” Related forms of the word are
found at Heb. 5:14, 12:2.
The classical text is De Diligendo Deo X:27-28. Read the translation

in Gilson (pp. 130–32): all the qualities of true and pure love
which take us out of ourselves and transform us in God. Bernard
concludes: Sic affici deificari est.137 Note the timidity of the trans-
lations into English: “To be thus affected is to become one with
God” (Connolly138); “Thus to be affected is to become Godlike”
(Gilson, who at the same time gives the Latin [p. 132—note {the}
misprint in {the} English version139] and adds a reference to St.
Maximus’ Ambigua140). For Bernard, divinization is the mystical
marriage. This implies a considerable development of the doc-
trine. We see in Bernard the full mystical explicitation of what is
contained and already quite explicit in the Fathers. Observe how
the idea of death to ourselves in order to live in Christ is ex-
pressed here. It is a mystical transposition of the literal death we
saw in the great martyr-theologians. {Note the} classical expres-
sions—the drop of water in the barrel of wine, etc. Note the na-
ture of this “death”: it is “death by absorption into a higher
life”—death brought about by a life—the end of one life by being
lifted into a higher life of a more exalted nature (see Durrwell,
Resurrection, p 228141). Conclusion: we can say with William of St.
137. PL 182, col. 991A.

138. Saint Bernard on the Love of God, trans. Terence L. Connolly, sj (New
York: Spiritual Book Associates, 1937), 38.
139. It reads “deificare” rather than “deificari”.
140. Gilson, 132, n. 195: the reference, to Ambigua, c. 2 (in the translation of
John Scotus Erigena) (PL 122, col. 1202AB) is given in Gilson, 26–27.
141. “In our Lord, life consummates and consecrates death, and similarly
in us death is brought about by a life. It is death by absorption into another’s
life. This death is not a separation of soul and body; it is the end of one life by
being lifted into a higher life whose nature is incompatible with the first” (F. X.
Durrwell, cssr, The Resurrection, A Biblical Study, trans. Rosemary Sheed [New
York: Sheed & Ward, 1960], 228). See Merton’s comment in his journal for April
16, 1961: “Durrwells’s [sic] book on the Resurrection, sent by Frank Sheed, is
excellent when you get into it. A remarkable insight into the visible and insti-
tutional aspect of the Church as something provisional, belonging along with
death and suffering to the time of imperfection. A necessary corrective. Too
Thierry, Festina particeps esse Spiritus Sancti.142 William makes

our transformation in Christ a matter of perfect mystical union
of wills: “Velle quod Deus vult, hoc est jam Deo similem esse; non
posse velle nisi quod Deus vult hoc est jam esse quod Deus est”
(Golden Epistle, II:5).143 He qualifies, this is not pantheism (see DS,
III:1410).144 Pastoral note: {the} Cistercian emphasis {is} on purity
of love and self-forgetfulness, {on} forming souls for contempla-
tion {in} simplicity, tranquillity, liberation from “self.”
{Note} the implications of this treatment of divinization by the Fathers
in the Anti-Arian controversy:
1) It makes very clear the close relationship between mysti-
cism and theology. In a certain sense it shows them to be one and
the same thing. By “mysticism” we can mean the personal ex-
perience of what is revealed to all and realized in all in the mys-
tery of Christ. And by “theology” we mean the common revelation
of the mystery which is to be lived by all. The two belong to-
gether. There is no theology without mysticism (for it would have
no relation to the real life of God in us) and there is no mysticism
without theology (because it would be at the mercy of individual
and subjective fantasy).
many evils are excused by a passionate and one-sided attachment to the Church
as a juridical institution” (Turning Toward the World, 108).
142. “Hasten to be a sharer of the Holy Spirit” (Speculum Fidei [PL 180, col.
384B, which reads: “Festina ergo . . . ”], quoted in André Fracheboud, “Divinisa-
tion, IV: Moyen Age: A. Auteurs Monastiques du 12e Siècle,” DS 3, col. 1408).
143. “To will what God wills, this is to be like God; to be able to will noth-
ing except what God wills is to be what God is” (Golden Epistle, II.3.15 [PL 184,
col. 348B, which reads: “Velle autem . . . similem Deo . . . ”], quoted in Frache-
boud, “Divinisation,” col. 1410.
144. “Quibus enim potestas data est filios Dei fieri, data est potestas, non quidem
ut sint Deus, sed sint tamen quod Deus est, sint sancti, futuri plene beati, quod Deus
est” (PL 184, col. 348B) (“For to these is given the power to become sons of God,
a power to be not as God is but rather what God is, to be holy, to be fully blessed
in the future, which is what God is”) (on this issue see Gilson, 212–14).
2) Mysticism and theology have one and the same end—they

culminate in theosis or the fullness of the divine life in the souls
of the faithful.
3) Lossky (p. 8)145 points out that the struggle of the Church to
safeguard the purity of dogma in every age is at the same time a
struggle to guarantee to each Christian free access to mystical union.
St. Irenaeus against the Gnostics defended the very concept of
deification as man’s last end. St. Athanasius, etc. against the Ari-
ans defend {the} divinity of {the} Word because {the} Word opens
to us the way to deification, {and} against the Macedonians, who
deny the divinity of the Holy Spirit who deifies us. {Likewise}
St. Cyril, etc. against {the} Nestorians, because Nestorianism sepa-
rates {the} humanity and divinity in Christ; {the} Cappadocian
Fathers against {the} Monophysites and Apollinarians, to show
that the fullness of human nature has been united to God in the
Word (“what has not been assumed is not saved”146); St. Maximus
against {the} monothelites, to safeguard the action of the human
will necessary for salvation and union, {and} against {the} icono-
clasts to reaffirm the possibility of divine mysteries being ex-
pressed in material forms. “In each case the central preoccupation
is always one thing that is at stake: the possibility, the mode, or
the means of union with God” (op. cit., p. 8). Note: Pseudo-Denis
the Areopagite in his theory of the theandric energy in Christ con-
tributes to the mystical clarification of dogma: two wills, two
liberties in “one single energy”; two natures united in “one the-
andric conscience”;147 the human conscience of Christ within the
145. ET: 10.

146. St. Gregory Nazianzen, “Letter 101, to Cledonius” (PG 37, col. 181C,
184A).
147. Merton seems to be somewhat imprecise here. In Letter 4 Pseudo-Dio-
nysius speaks of “theandric energy” (qeandrikh;n ejnevrgeian) (PG 3, col. 1072C),
but not of a “single” energy (monoenergism), a term that later will be favored
by the monophysite Severus of Antioch (though a variant text of the passage
does read “a single theandric energy” [mian qeandrikh;n ejnevrgeian]: see Jaroslav
Pelikan’s Introduction to Pseudo-Dionysius, The Complete Works, trans. Colm
Luibheid [New York: Paulist, 1987], 20); also, he does not use the term “na-
divine conscience—this is the pattern for the soul, one with God
in Christ.
B. Theoria Mystike, Theognosis: Mystical Contemplation
So far we have seen that Christian mysticism begins before
the term mysticism is used. The essence of the concept of mystical
union is contained in the doctrine of St. Ignatius Martyr. The
concept of contemplation is first developed under the term gnosis.
The Fathers, unanimous in stating that divinization is the end of
the Christian life, stress the transformation of the Christian in
Christ. In all these treatments there has been present the acknowl-
edgement that our gnosis and divinization involve a transitus, a
passing over into a hidden realm, so that our “life is hidden with
Christ in God.”148 This implies that the experience of union with
Christ is a hidden experience, something secret and incommuni-
cable, an experience of something that is hidden on the ordinary
levels of Christian life. Hence we must discuss the first appear-
ance of the concept of mysticism and mystical experience in
Christian tradition.
1. The Greek classical term, mystikos, refers to the hidden
rites of the mystery religions—not to a hidden experience, but to
the mystery which is revealed only to the initiates and through
which they pass. It does not refer directly to an “experience,”
certainly not to a spiritual experience in our sense of the word.
Bouyer stresses this149 in order to prove that Christian “mysti-
cism” is not a simple carry-over from the pagan mystery cults.
However, it may be remarked that implicitly one who has been
initiated and passed through the secret rites has “experienced”
what it means to be an initiate. He has not merely learned a few
new rubrics, unknown to others. Bouyer also insists that mysti-
cism in the pagan sense is not a “hidden doctrine” based on an
ture” (fuvs i~) with regard to the humanity of Christ. See René Rocques, L’Univers
Dionysien: Structure Hiérarchique du Monde selon le Pseudo-Denys (Paris: Aubier,
1954), 310–11, especially 311, n. 6, and 309, 312.
148. Col. 3:3.
ineffable personal experience. However he admits that poets and

philosophers developed “mystical” doctrines based on rites of
which they had knowledge and which remained secret. These
“mystical” doctrines were difficult and recondite and, we might
add, tended to be “spiritual.”
2. Christian use of the term mystic (mystikos):150 Clement and
Origen take over the pagan term and use it in reference to the
spiritual (mystical or typological) sense of Scripture. For them the
mystical sense is the real sense. To discover the mystical sense is
to penetrate to the real meaning of revelation and hence to pene-
trate into the hidden things of God, the mystery of Christ. This
mystery, the mysterion of the Cross, is the central reality of all
cosmic life: the salvation of the world, the recapitulation of all in
Christ. Hence, as we have seen, the “gnostic” is the man who has
entered into this “mystical” understanding of Scripture. Origi-
nally, the mystical sense of Scripture is: (a) that which points to
Christ; (b) that which deals with invisible realities of faith; (c)
that which is spiritual and not carnal, i.e. not involved in {the}
“letter” of the Law and of Scripture. It cannot be too often re-
peated that this “mystical sense” of Scripture is not a hidden idea
about God or a mere complex of difficult or secret truths. It is a
reality experienced and lived. One might say that for the Fathers
the letter tended to be doctrine and law, the spirit tended to be
reality and life. Their theology was therefore not simply con-
structed with the literal elements of revelation; it was built on an
experience of the ineffable reality of revelation, or of God re-
vealed in the mystery of Christ. Hence it is clear that already to
enter into the mystical sense or real sense of Scripture, which is
interior and spiritual, one must “die to” the letter, to the exterior
and apparent meaning; one must “go beyond,” one must “stand
outside” (ekstasis) the apparent meaning. This does not necessar-
ily imply a strict opposition between the letter and the spirit, but
simply a fulfillment of the letter in the spirit. (De facto the opposi-
150. See Histoire de Spiritualité, vol. 1, 486; ET: 407.

tion gets to be overstressed.) Hence in any case the way is pre-

pared for a “theoria” which requires an abandonment of what is
“seen” and a going beyond to what is “not seen.” This need not
yet be mystical in the modern sense of the word. Examples: the
“mystical sacrifice” of the Eucharist as opposed to the bloody
sacrifice of the Old Law: the “real” sacrifice, not the appearance;
“mystical bread”—the Body of the Lord; {the} “mystical table”
(altar), “mystical action” (Mass), “mystical water” (baptism).151
3. Theognosis, and theoria mystike—mystical contemplation.
According to Bouyer, Origen in a characteristically “gnostic”
passage in his commentary on St. John (13:24), speaks of Christ
as our guide in “mystical and ineffable contemplation”152—i.e.
to the spiritual understanding of Scripture. This text is not a com-
mentary on John 13, v. 24 but on chapter 4, the line “Spiritus est
Deus et qui adorant eum in spiritu et veritate oportet adorare.”153 This
takes up nn. 21-25 of Tome XIII of the Commentary in Joannem of
Origen.154 He explains how God is the “incorporeal light”155 illu-
minating the mind, the incorporeal fire purifying us, the incor-
poreal Spirit giving us life and leading us to Himself. “He who
is deprived of the divine Spirit is made earthly; he who disposes
himself to receive the Divine Spirit and receives Him, is renewed
and created afresh.”156
But how are we to know the Divine Spirit? No one knows the
Father but the Son. We come to know God in the following way:
a) The Son reveals to us how God is Spirit.
b) We must adore Him in Spirit and truth, not in the letter
which killeth.
151. See Histoire de Spiritualité, vol. 1, 488–89; ET: 409.

152. In Joannem, 13.24 (PG 14, col. 440C): see Histoire de Spiritualité, vol. 1,
489; ET: 410.
153. “God is Spirit, and whoever worships him must worship in spirit and
in truth” (Jn. 4:24).
154. PG 14, cols. 432C-444B.
155. In Joannem, 13.23 (PG 14, col. 437/438B).
156. In Joannem, 13.24 (PG 14, col. 437/438C).
c) We must worship Him no longer in figures and types but

like the angels who worship Him without the “shadows”157 that
intervene, in intelligible and heavenly things (he does not fully
explain {this idea} here—evidently {it is} more immediate).
d) (The angels) summum illum sacerdotem secundum ordinem
Melchisedec pro orantium atque egentium salute habentes ducem
cultus mystici atque ineffabilis visionis.158 We only have the Latin
here.159 It is possible that Bouyer, who considers this the first ex-
ample of the use of “mystical contemplation” in Christian tradi-
tion, is mistaken. He unites mystici with visionis. It is quite possible
that the phrase is to be divided into (Christ the) “ducem cultus
mystici” (i.e. {the} familiar concept of choregos always introduced
in connection with angels) {and} “et ineffabilis visionis.” It is then
the “cult” that is mystical rather than the “vision” (this is ineffa-
ble). The point is not too important. The meaning of the text is
clear enough. To definitively decide, one would have to see the
Greek.
Note {the} predilection of {the} Greek Fathers for “mystic”
in connection with angelic adoration of God. The angels do not
“discuss the divine essence” says Chrysostom (Incomprehensibility
157. In Joannem, 13.24 (PG 14, col. 439/440C).

158. “having that high priest according to the order of Melchizedek as
leader of the ritual of the mystical and ineffable vision [or: of the mystical ritual
and ineffable vision], for the salvation of those praying and acting” (PG 14, col.
439C, quoted in Histoire de Spiritualité, vol. 1, 489–90; ET: 410).
159. Merton does not mean that this text, like so much of Origen’s work,
survives only in Latin translation, but rather that the text of the Patrologia Graeca
at Gethsemani consisted only of the Latin translations, not of the Greek origi-
nals. In fact, the original Greek does confirm that Bouyer’s translation of the
passage is correct and that “mystical” belongs with “vision” not with “cult”:
“to;n kata; th;n tavxin tou` Melcisede;k ajrciereva oJdhgo;n e[conte~ uJpo;; tw`n deomevnwn
swthpiva~ latreiva~ kai mustikh`~ kai; ajporrhvtou qewriva~” (“having a high priest
according to the order of Melchizedek as guide of worship and of mystical and
ineffable vision, for the salvation of those in need”) (note the additional “kai;” in
the Greek before “mustikh`~,” which has no corresponding “et” in the Latin).
of God I, SC p. 100-102),160 but they “sing triumphal and mystic

odes,” i.e. the sanctus. Dom Leclercq (Love of Learning and Desire
for God, p. 120) says Origen’s Commentary on the Canticles was
“less mystical and more psychological” than that of Gregory of
Nyssa, which was more concerned with the sacraments and
more pastoral. Note {the} objectivity of “mystical” in this ancient
sense.
With the Cappadocian Fathers, whatever may be the use of
terms, we have clear references to “mystical contemplation.” We
shall see this especially in Gregory of Nyssa. First, a text from St.
Gregory Nazianzen, a “classical” description of mystical contem-
plation in Platonic language:
It appears to me that there is nothing preferable to the state

of that man who, closing his senses to exterior impressions,
escaping from the flesh and from the world, enters into
himself and, retaining no further contact with anything
human, except in so far as necessity obliges, conversing
with himself and with God, lives above visible things and
carries in himself divine images, always pure, having truly
become, and becoming each day more and more, the spot-
less mirror of the divinity and of divine things, receiving
their light in his light, their resplendent clarity in his own
weaker light, already plucking in hope the fruit of future
life, living in communion with the angels, still on this earth
and yet out of this world, lifted up into supernal regions
by the Spirit (from Oratio II:7, quoted by Bouyer, Hist. Spir.
I, 418161).
Here we have at any rate the conception that to enter into the
contemplation and possession of things hidden, one must “die
to” exterior experience and rise from death on a new level. This
is the kind of text that sometimes misleads:
160. Jean Chrysostome, Sur l’Incompréhensibilité de Dieu, trans. Robert

Flageliere, intro. Ferdinand Cavallera, sj and Jean Daniélou, sj, SC 28 (Paris:
Éditions du Cerf, 1951).
161. ET: 347 (PG 35, col. 413C, 416A).
a) Its Christian elements are only implicit; it is more typically

pagan.
b) It exploits too emphatically a supposed “separation” and
incompatibility between the sensible and the spiritual; {there is
an} overstress on “introversion.”
c) It does not stress the action of grace.
Such texts should therefore not be studied alone and out of their
context and out of the whole orientation of the writer to whom
they belong.
The Mysticism of the Cappadocian Fathers
1. Its special importance: here we come upon the first great
Christian mystics. This applies especially to St. Gregory of Nyssa,
in a lesser degree to St. Gregory Nazianzen. St. Basil is more an
ascetic and dogmatic than a mystical theologian, though himself
a mystic. St. Gregory {of} Nyssa on the other hand is the Father
of Christian mysticism much more truly than Clement or Origen.
What we have seen so far prepares the way for Gregory of Nyssa
and for his truly and strictly mystical theology. The great origi-
nality of Gregory of Nyssa is to be stressed.
a) True, he uses Platonic elements and language, but this
must not blind us to the originality and depth of his experience.
He clearly goes beyond Origen, his master, in the field of truly
mystical experience, rather than intellectual penetration of the
spiritual sense of Scripture.
b) This originality is all the more apparent now that the au-
thorship of the De Instituto Christiano has been definitively re-
stored to him by Werner Jaeger, while at the same time the full
text of this important treatise has been discovered.162
162. The text of the treatise generally called De Instituto Christiano had
been published in what Jaeger calls an “abridged and mutilated form” (Two
Rediscovered Works, 3, n. 1) in PG 46, cols. 287–306; the authentic text appears
in Jaeger’s edition of Gregorii Nysseni Opera vol. VIII, I: Gregorii Nysseni Opera
Ascetica (Leiden: Brill, 1952), 1–89; Jaeger’s conclusion (Two Rediscovered Works,
174–207) that the De Instituto Christiano was the source for the Great Letter of
In St. Gregory of Nyssa the dogmatic writings, even those

which are purely controversial, have a direct orientation to the
mystical life. His replies to Eunomius and Apollinaris are a defense
of basic truths of the mystical life, especially of the divine tran-
scendence and of the necessity to know God “by unknowing.”
The treatise De Hominis Opificio163 is not merely speculative, but
considers man as created for contemplation and union with God.
He develops the conception of man which reached William of St.
Thierry via Scotus Erigena: man as psyche (anima)—homo animalis;
nous (ratio)—homo rationalis; pneuma (spiritus)—homo spiritualis.164
Pseudo-Macarius, rather than vice versa, has subsequently been widely chal-
lenged by other scholars, who consider that Gregory, or his disciples, produced
a revised text of the Great Letter: see Reinhart Staats, Gregor von Nyssa und die
Messalianer, Patristische Texte und Studien, 8 (Berlin: De Gruyter, 1968), as
well as his 1984 edition of the two texts (Makarios-Symeon: Epistola Magna. Eine
Messalianische Mönchsregel und ihre Umschrift in Gregors von Nyssa ‘De Instituto
Christiano’ [Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1984]); M. Canévet, “Le ‘De
Instituto Christiano’ est-il de Grégoire de Nysse?” Revue des Études Grecques, 82
(1969), 404-23; Vincent Despres, Introduction to Pseudo-Macaire: Oeuvres Spiri-
tuelles: Homélies propres à la Collection III, SC 275 (Paris: Éditions du Cerf, 1980);
arguments summarized by George A. Maloney, sj in the Introduction to his
translation of Pseudo-Macarius: The Fifty Spiritual Homilies and the Great Letter
(New York: Paulist, 1992), 10–11 and 28, n. 5.
163. PG 44, cols. 123C–256C.
164. In the Golden Epistle (A Letter to the Brethren at Mont Dieu), trans. Theo-
dore Berkeley, ocso, Cistercian Fathers [CF], vol. 12 (Kalamazoo, MI: Cistercian
Publications, 1976), William uses the framework of three levels of spiritual de-
velopment: “there are beginners, those who are making progress and the perfect.
The state of beginners may be called ‘animal,’ the state of those who are making
progress ‘rational’ and the state of the perfect ‘spiritual’” (1:12 [25]). See also
Déchanet, William of St. Thierry: The Man and His Work: “What strikes one about
the book on the soul is the fact that three-quarters of it comes from St. Gregory
of Nyssa’s De hominis opificio” (39); and Déchanet, Aux Sources de la Spiritualité de
Guillaume de Saint-Thierry, 56, which points out that William used the translation
made by Scotus rather than that by Dionysius Exiguus; this translation, which
survives in only one manuscript, was discovered by Dom Maïeul Cappuyns:
see his Jean Scot Erigène, Sa Vie, Son Oeuvre, Sa Pensée (Paris: Desclée de Brouwer,
1933), 173–76; he later published the translation in “Le De Imagine de Grégoire
However, returning to the question of “mysticism” in Gregory

{of} Nyssa, we find it still means primarily the penetration of the
hidden sense of Scripture. See {the} Prologue to Canticle of Canticles—
his purpose is “by proper contemplation” (theoria) to open up
the “philosophy hidden in the words” (of the Canticle).165 In Homily
1 he says his exposition itself will be a mystike theoria166 or mystical
contemplation of the Canticle of Canticles. Contemplation is the
apprehension of the mystical meaning of Scripture, but this mys-
tical meaning is not a new concept—it is a reality—a divine reality
apprehended in a spiritual experience. This is gnosis mysterion167
(mystical) based on cathara politeia168 (pure life, ascetical) and it
is the function of all Scripture to open up both to us.
The influence of the Cappadocians and especially Gregory {of}
Nyssa is of the utmost importance. It extends in many different
directions:
a) Evagrius and the Desert School, and hence through Cassian
({a} disciple of Evagrius) to the West.
b) Pseudo-Dionysius and the mysticism of night, hence also
to the West once again, and particularly to the Cistercian Fathers,
especially William of St. Thierry. Note: the Cistercians are heirs of
St. Gregory of Nyssa in three ways: first, through the Origenist
current, secondly through Cassian, then through the Dionysian
movement which however affects fewer of our Fathers ({it} hardly
touches Bernard).
c) Pseudo-Macarius and through him the Syrian tradition,
Isaac of Nineveh, etc.
de Nysse Traduit par Jean Scot Erigène,” Recherches de Théologie Ancienne et

Médiévale, 32 (1965), 205–62.
165. PG 44, col. 756A.
166. PG 44, col. 765A.
167. PG 44, col. 757A (Prologue, which reads gnw`s in musthrivwn [gnosin mys-
terion]).
168. PG 44, col. 757B (Prologue, which reads kaqara;n politeivan [katharan
politeian]).
d) St. Maximus and the main line of Oriental (Byzantine)

mysticism.
Example of the Cappadocian influence: the doctrine of St. Bernard
on “pure love,”169 by which the image of God is perfected in man
and the “lost likeness” is recovered, is a legacy of the Cappadocian
tradition. In the Cappadocian Fathers we find the familiar division
of spiritual men into three classes: slaves; mercenaries; sons170—ac-
cording to the disinterestedness of their love for the Father. This
is the basis of St. Bernard’s De Diligendo Deo.171 Note that the divi-
sion is already adumbrated in Clement of Alexandria, Stromata
IV172 (on which Fénelon bases his “pure love”173).
The Mysticism of Night: in St. Gregory of Nyssa (particularly
the De Vita Moysis) we find the first clear Christian formulation
169. See Gilson’s discussion of “pure love” (140–49), an analysis particu-

larly of Sermon 83 on the Songs of Songs.
170. See St. Basil’s Preface to his Long Rules, in Ascetical Works, trans. M.
Monica Wagner, csc, FC 9 (Washington, DC: Catholic University of America
Press, 1950), 277, and St. Gregory of Nyssa, The Life of Moses, trans. Everett Fer-
guson and Abraham J. Malherbe (New York: Paulist, 1978), 136–37.
171. See Bernard of Clairvaux, On Loving God, 34–38 (cc. 12–14), trans.
Robert Walton, osb, in The Works of Bernard of Clairvaux: Treatises II, CF 13 (Wash-
ington, DC: Cistercian Publications, 1974), 125–30; these chapters were origi-
nally a letter to the Carthusians that Bernard appended to the De Diligendo Deo
as a conclusion.
172. See Clement of Alexandria, Stromata, IV.6 (PG 8, 1241AB), and Stro-
mata, VII. 2 (PG 9, col. 409A).
173. See François de Fénelon, Le Gnostique de Saint Clément d’Alexandrie,
opuscule inédit de Fénelon, ed. Paul Dudon (Paris: Beauchesne, 1930) and
L’Explication des Maximes des Saints, now available in English as Explanation of
the Maxims of the Saints on the Interior Life, in Chad Helms, ed. and trans., Fénelon:
Selected Writings (New York: Paulist, 2006), 207–97; see also Gabriel Joppin, Fé-
nelon et la Mystique du Pur Amour (Paris: Beauchesne, 1938), especially “Le Gnos-
tique de Saint Clément d’Alexandrie” (126–30), François Varillon, Fénelon et le
Pur Amour (Paris: Éditions du Seuil, 1957), and Pierre Pourrat, “Charité: V.5.11:
Fénelon,” DS 2, cols. 621–22; Fénelon’s teaching on pure love in the Explication
was condemned by Pope Innocent XII in 1699 after intense pressure from King
Louis XIV and Bishop Bossuet.
of apophatic mysticism—mysticism of darkness, unknowing, or

night. However, it must be remembered that this had already
been anticipated by the Platonists and Philo Judaeus, and there
is probably a link with Oriental thought, however obscure. The
apophatic mysticism of the Christian Fathers is a definite resem-
blance to Oriental mysticism. But it should not be rejected or
dismissed precisely for this reason. It is an important fact. There
is nothing whatever to be gained by calling Gregory of Nyssa
and Pseudo-Dionysius “Buddhists” and then having no more to
do with them. This oversimplification would bring with it its
own punishment. It would cut us off from what is actually the
main line of the Christian mystical tradition, even though it may
not appear to be so.
The Reason for Apophatic Mysticism: why did Gregory {of}
Nyssa stress the mysticism of “night” and “unknowing”? The
dogmatic reasons for this are to be sought in the treatises of St.
Basil174 and then of St. Gregory {of} Nyssa Against Eunomius;175
cf. also the homilies preached by St. John Chrysostom “On the
Incomprehensibility of God.” The Eunomians or Anomeans {were}
Arians who held that the essence of God could be and was clearly
known. {This led to} a false and oversimplified intellectualism in
contemplation. The divine essence could be apprehended intel-
lectually and exhaustively in the mere fact that one accepted the
supposed revelation of God as “not engendered.”176 Once one
“saw” the “truth” of this (heretical) postulate that the Father
alone, the “not-engendered,” was God, one entered into the full
light of the divine essence and God Himself had no more light
than this. The Son and the Holy Spirit {were} both “creatures” of
God. Note that this is a complete evacuation of all mystical con-
tent from Christianity. Note that once again Christian mysticism
174. Liber Eunomii Apologeticus (PG 30, cols. 835B–868C).

175. Contra Eunomium Libri Duodecim (PG 45, cols. 243B–1122B).
176. See J. N. D. Kelly, Early Christian Doctrines, revised ed. (San Francisco:
Harper & Row, 1978), 249: since only the Father is ingenerate (ajgevnnhto~), by
definition only the Father is truly God.
is inextricably bound up with the revelation of the Three Divine

Persons. Now an added note is imperative: that the essence of God
transcends all knowledge by a creature. St. Gregory of Nyssa declared
that the doctrine of the Eunomians was not theology but “tech-
nology”177 (referring to the fact that the Word is simply an instru-
ment by which God makes other created beings).
Note: the Homilies of St. Chrysostom On the Incomprehensibility
of God are to be studied in connection with the apophatism of
Gregory {of} Nyssa. These homilies are not in themselves mystical.
They are preached to the ordinary faithful, and do not presup-
pose a deep supernatural experience, only the ordinary life of
faith nourished by the liturgy and by a deep living awareness of
the reality of God, especially in the liturgical mysteries. But the
living awareness of the majesty of God is precisely in proportion
to our realization that He is beyond our knowledge. Not only is
His essence incomprehensible to us but above all His judgements,
His gifts, His rewards, His mercies. All these statements {are} based
on St. Paul, v.g. Rom. 11:33, 1 Cor. 2:9, 2 Cor. 9:15, Phil. 4:7. Where
{the} Anomeans stress the “clear [intellectual] knowledge of
God”178 in a concept, Chrysostom reacts forcefully. Such a concept
is purely a mental figment, an idol. Besides it is heretical. But even
concepts that are not false must not be confused with genuine
experience of God. The experience of divine truth is not the com-
prehension of an intellectual concept, not the light generated by
the understanding of an abstract truth. Chrysostom replaces this
intellectual light (really “curiosity”) with the experience of the
“fear of God,” {a} traditional interpretation of the text that “The
fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom.”179 Note this is not
a denial of intellectual study or of theology. It is the removal of
a false experience which is shallow and illusory, and the restoration
of the true basis of Christian experience, which is the fear of the
177. See Chrysostome, l’Incomprehensibilité, 13.

178. See Chrysostome, l’Incomprehensibilité, Introduction I: “Saint Jean
Chrysostome et l’Anoméisme” (7–15).
179. Prov. 1:7; this passage is actually never quoted in the sermons.
Lord, sacred awe, born of faith and nourished by participation

in the liturgical mysteries “with the angels.”180 ({A} pastoral com-
ment: the atmosphere of curiosities {is} fatal to true contempla-
tion.) Hence the homilies of Chrysostom, while not dealing
directly with the mystical life, are in actual fact supremely im-
portant as guaranteeing true conditions that make that life pos-
sible: once again {we see} the sense of the Christian mysteries,
worship in spirit and in truth. St. Chrysostom prays:
Let us invoke Him as the inexpressible God, incompre-

hensible, invisible and unknowable; let us avow that He
surpasses all power of human speech, that He eludes the
grasp of every mortal intelligence, that the angels cannot
penetrate Him nor the seraphim see Him in full clarity, nor
the cherubim fully understand Him, for He is invisible to
the Principalities and Powers, the Virtues and all creatures
without exception; only the Son and the Holy Spirit know Him
(Incomprehensibility of God III; SC p. 166).181
The Mystical Ascent: very briefly, the ascent to God in Gregory

of Nyssa (De Vita Moysis) is a passage from light to obscurity to
total darkness. To penetrate into the total darkness is to enter into
the holy of holies, the sanctuary of God. There is a two-fold sym-
bolism: Moses’ experiences with the burning bush and on the
mountain, and finally the tabernacle divided into the “Holy,” the
inner part which is pure but still accessible to the people, and the
“Holy of Holies” which is forbidden to the people. The mystical
life has three stages ({the} classical division):
1. Light, the burning bush: purgation—we die to the pas-
sions by apatheia.
2. Cloud (obscurity): illumination (gnosis)—we die to intel-
lectual knowledge on {the} natural level and attain to theoria
(physica).
180. See Chrysostome, l’Incomprehensibilité, Introduction III: “La Terreur

Sacrée” (33–45).
181. Homily 3.
3. “Holy of Holies,” Deep Darkness: union—not gnosis but

ousia.182
It is supremely important to see how clearly Gregory goes beyond
gnosis to ousia by love. Definitely for him gnosis is not an end but
a beginning.
{Gregory provides an} example of the “first darkness,” {the}
entrance into the revelation of God’s hidden designs and judge-
ments. Gregory says of St. Basil, “Often we have seen him enter
into the gnophos [darkness] where God was found. The inspira-
tion [mystagogia] of the Spirit alone made known to him what
was unknowable to others, so that he appeared to be enveloped
in the darkness where the Word of God is hidden” (quoted in DS
II:1873).183 This is a relative darkness. Things of God hidden to man
can however be revealed. The real step is beyond gnosis, beyond il-
lumination (even in darkness); it is a union with God in ecstasis,
a going out of one’s own being to become one with the being of
God. This divine essence cannot be known by a created intellect
as it is in itself, says Gregory. This ecstasy is a mystical death. This
transformation is accomplished by the replacement of gnosis by
agape. The following points are vitally important:
1. It is therefore a death of love, but on the highest mystical
and existential level.
2. It is not love considered as {having} a purely ethical or
psychological value.
3. It is certainly not love as the love of an isolated subject for
a well-defined object.
4. It is an existential contact and communion with the very
being of God, which remains unknowable in all its fullness. The
darkness, however, is a positive reality and a light. It is more true
than any determinate conceptual knowledge of God.
182. “knowledge . . . being, substance.”

183. In Laude Fratris Basilii (PG 46, col. 812C), quoted in Jean Daniélou,
“Contemplation chez les Orientaux Chrétiens: III. La Contemplation de Dieu:
D. Mystique de la Ténèbre chez Grégoire de Nysse.”
A pertinent quotation from the Homilies in Cantica (“In the

night on my bed I sought Him whom my soul loveth”): what is
the mystical night?
Night designates the contemplation [theoria] of invisible

things after the manner of Moses who entered into the
darkness where God was, this God who makes of dark-
ness His hiding place (Ps. 17:12). . . . Surrounded by the
divine night the soul seeks Him who is hidden in dark-
ness. She possesses indeed the love of Him whom she seeks,
but the Beloved escapes the grasp of her thoughts. . . .
Therefore abandoning the search she recognizes Him whom
she desires by the very fact that His knowledge is beyond
understanding. Thus she says, “Having left behind all cre-
ated things and abandoned the aid of the understanding,
by faith alone I have found my Beloved. And I will not let
Him go, holding Him by the grip of faith, until He enters
into my bedchamber.” The chamber is the heart, which is ca-
pable of the divine indwelling when it is restored to its primitive
state (PG 44:892-893).184
This is a description of mystical union. N.B. this is not to be

understood as a sales talk. We don’t preach mysticism. It is not
something that can be taught, still less a proper subject for
exhortation.
The familiar example of Moses appears here as everywhere.
Note the special importance of:
a) Possession by love and not by knowledge.
b) Abandonment of the search for clear knowledge, and rest in
liberty and unknowing. A simple characteristic of the mystical
soul is its awakening (a real awakening, to transformation, con-
version of mind) to the fact that it really need not seek Him
Whom it already possesses—plus an ability to rest in darkness
and unknowing, without care and without concern over concep-
tual knowledge. Where this ability to rest is not found, there may
184. In Cantica, 10, quoted in Daniélou, “Contemplation,” col. 1875.

be a sentimental or intellectual operation of “unknowing” fol-

lowed by a blank and by sleep. This is not mysticism!
c) Distinguish the intellectual via negativa, or apophatic specu-
lation, from real apophatic contemplation. The former is dialectical
and discursive. It reasons. The latter is intuitive and is produced
by love.
d) Note the essential role of purity of heart, spiritual virgin-
ity, return to the primitive, paradisiacal state.
e) The experience of the indwelling of God by faith.
Ecstasis in Gregory of Nyssa: is this something beyond dark-
ness? It is beyond the darkness of gnosis. But {it} is another aspect
of the union with God in darkness in the state we have just de-
scribed. It is theologia. It is a “going out” from itself by the soul
under the pressure of the divine transcendence. It is connected
with awe and admiration. It suddenly seizes upon the soul and
takes it out of itself. It is also referred to as sobria ebrietas—a term
borrowed from Philo.185 “In this drunkenness, David went forth
from himself and entered into ecstasy and saw the invisible
beauty, after which he pronounced the memorable word, ‘Every
man is a liar’” (quoted in DS II:1878).186 It is a vigilant sleep: “I
sleep and my heart watches.”187 Another good text from the Homi-
lies in Cantica: “Then the activity of the heart is exercised in all
its purity and the spirit contemplates realities from on high with-
out any impression coming to trouble it in its repose. The soul takes
joy in nothing but the contemplation of reality, and letting all
bodily activity fall asleep by purity and nudity of spirit, she re-
ceives the manifestation of God in a divine vigil” (PG 44:993).188
185. “sober intoxication”: In Cantica, sermons 5, 10, 12 (PG 44, cols. 873B,
990B, 1032B); In Ascensionem Christi (PG 46, col. 692BC) (see Daniélou, “Contem-
plation,” cols. 1878–79, and Histoire de Spiritualité, vol. 1, 52, n. 90 [ET: 31, n. 90];
also 435 [ET: 362]).
186. In Cantica, 10 (PG 44, col. 989D).
187. Song of Songs 5:2, quoted in In Cantica, 10 (PG 44, col. 992C).
188. Quoted in Daniélou, “Contemplation,” col. 1879 (there should be an
ellipsis after “. . . repose.”).
Elsewhere: “All carnal passion being extinct in us we burn lov-

ingly with the flame of the Spirit alone” (id. 773).189
Epectasis—a characteristic and personal doctrine of Gregory
of Nyssa is that of epectasis, the ever-increasing growth of love
and desire and penetration into the inexhaustible ocean of divine
light. As there is no limit to the infinite, even in heaven we will
continue to grow, in a certain manner, in love and knowledge.
This is the teaching of St. Gregory of Nyssa. Daniélou describes
epectasis as “a desire that is perpetually fulfilled without ever
exhausting its object and which therefore goes on in a progress
that has no end” (DS II:1884).
C. The Spiritual Senses: the doctrine of the spiritual senses
plays a central part in Gregory of Nyssa. His teaching of apophatic
mysticism and unknowing is accompanied paradoxically by an
insistence on the existential reality of the mystical experience. It is
a true experience of God, analogous to the direct perception of a
sense object by the bodily senses. But the analogy is rather the
other way round: the experience of God by the spiritual senses is
in fact more direct and more immediate than the perception of a
sensible object by the bodily senses. The mystic has to appeal to
ordinary sense experience in order to attempt to express an ex-
perience which is ineffable because even more immediate than an
experience by the exterior senses. We must understand when the
mystic says he is “touched” by God it means that he experiences
not only something analogous to a bodily touch but far more, in
a spiritual order, which cannot be expressed directly. He is really
touched by God, and this touch is experienced as what it is. J.
Daniélou190 praises Gregory’s use of the spiritual senses, following
Origen of course. (We bypass Origen here—reference is made to
his doctrine of spiritual senses in The Fathers and Cassian.191) This
189. In Cantica, 1 (PG 44, col. 773D), quoted in Daniélou, “Contemplation,”

col. 1881.
190. See Daniélou, Platonisme et Théologie Mystique, 225–26, and the discus-
sion below, 92–96.
191. Cassian and the Fathers, 29.
Origenist use of spiritual senses is more Biblical (gustate et videte

. . .192). It is quite true that when the Bible wishes to express the
experience of God it is always in the language of the senses. But
at the same time we must realize that there must be a distinction
between genuinely spiritual experience which is eo ipso193 not
sensible, and an interior spiritual experience in which the senses
(of the body or at least the interior senses) have a part.
Clarification:
a) When we talk of the spiritual senses we are talking of a
very special apprehension of God which is in no way dependent
on the bodily or interior senses. Hence we are discussing a special
class of mystical experiences which are not “mystical phenom-
ena,” not visions, etc.
b) The exercise of the spiritual senses is then analogical.
c) In this exercise, grace, or the action of the Holy Spirit, supplies
for the action of the senses, whether exterior or interior, by defini-
tion excluded and impossible. Hence it is no longer true to say that
in mystical experience there is nihil in intellectu quod non prius in
sensu.194 St. Bonaventure defines spiritual senses as “usus gratiae
interioris respectu ipsius Dei”195 (for this see {Olphe-Galliard}196 in
Études Carmélitaines, Nos Sens et Dieu [1954], p. 180 and ff.).
d) The mystical action of {the} spiritual senses must also not
be confused with the literary use of ordinary sensible data in
order to convey or express the inexpressible. There are many
mystical texts where sense experience is used allegorically, or
192. “Taste and see [that the Lord is good]” (Ps. 33 [34]:9).
193. “in and of itself”; “by its very nature.”
194. “There is nothing in the intellect that is not first in the senses” (quoted
in M. Olphe-Galliard, sj, “Les Sens Spirituels dans l’Histoire de la Spiritualité,”
Études Carmélitaines, 2: Nos Sens et Dieu [1954], 180).
195. “the exercise of interior grace with respect to God Himself”: Commen-
tary on the Sentences, III, D. 13, dub. 1, Sancti Bonaventurae Opera Omnia, ed. PP.
Collegii S. Bonaventurae, 10 vols. (Quaracchi: Collegium Sancti Bonaventurae,
1882–1902), 3:291, quoted in Olphe-Galliard, “Sens Spirituels,” 186.
196. Merton consistently misspells this name as “Olphe Gaillard.”
metaphorically. This is a literary and poetic, one might say an

aesthetic, function of the senses, and must not be explained by
the term “spiritual senses”: v.g. in the poem “Dark Night” when
St. John of the Cross speaks of going down a secret stairway, and
in disguise.197 These are poetic images.
e) Special Problems created by the Doctrine of the Spiritual Senses
in the West:
1. The doctrine of the spiritual senses which began with
Origen is united in Gregory of Nyssa with apophatic mysticism
in a perfectly integrated wholeness. The two approaches to the phe-
nomenology of mysticism balance and correct one another. The
doctrine of the spiritual senses develops both in Western and
Eastern Christendom. In an early, simple and traditional form
we find a sane and unassuming doctrine of the spiritual senses
not so much exposed as supposed—in St. Benedict and St. Gregory
the Great: in the Rule—apertis oculis ad Deificum lumen;198 aurem
cordis;199 in St. Gregory—palatum cordis;200 in aure cordis.201 The
advantage is that the doctrine remains simple, concrete, biblical,
and is not an analysis or systematization of experience but simply
a statement of loving knowledge: Amor ipse notitia est.202 There is
197. The Complete Works of Saint John of the Cross, ed. and trans. E. Allison
Peers, 3 vols. (Westminster, MD: Newman Press, 1946), 1.10.
198. “Let us open our eyes to the divine light” (Rule, Prologue, 1 [McCann,
6/7]).
199. “[incline] the ear of thy heart” (Rule, Prologue, 1 [McCann, 6/7]).
200. “the palate of the heart” (Epistola 17 [PL 77, col. 921A]).
201. “in the ear of the heart” (used frequently by Gregory: see PL 75, col.
706B [Moralia, Bk. 5, c. 29]; PL 76, cols. 535B, 535C, 902B, 927C, 948A, 1150B
[Moralia, Bk. 30, c. 5; Homelia in Ezechiel, Bk. 1, 6.39, 12.19, Bk. 2, 2.18; Homelia in
Evangelia, I.18.1]; PL 77, col. 1130D).
202. “Love itself is a kind of knowledge” (St. Gregory the Great: Hom-
ily 27.4 [PL 76, col. 1207A]; St Bernard, De Diversis, 29.1, quoting Gregory [PL
183, col. 620BC]); see also the similar phrase “Amor ipse intellectus est” used by
William of St. Thierry in his Disputatio adversus Petrum Abaelardum (PL 180, col.
252C), in the Epistola ad Fratres de Monte Dei (PL 184, col. 356A) and in his Com-
mentary on the Song of Songs (PL 180, cols. 491D, 499C).
no theorizing about the spiritual senses. The statements made

are often rather vague and offhand, so that one is never quite
sure if they involve more than a literary metaphor. The best and
most traditional source for the spiritual senses is the rite of baptism
(q.v.).203 We regret that we have to pass over the very important
relation of the spiritual senses to the sacramental life in which
they are principally developed.
2. But the doctrine of the spiritual senses is sometimes over-
emphasized, to the detriment of the apophatic element. Where
this happens, the impression is created that mysticism is simply
sensible experience on a miraculous plane—objective visions of
the Sacred Humanity of Christ, etc.
203. In the rite of baptism of adults, the priest made the sign of the cross
successively on the ears, eyes, nostrils and mouth of the person to be baptized,
saying in turn: “Signo tibi aures, ut audias divina praecepta, . . . oculos, ut videas
claritatem Dei. . . . nares, ut odorem suavitatis Christi sentias. . . . os, ut loquaris
verba vitae” (“I make the sign on your ears, that you might hear the divine com-
mands, . . . on your eyes, that you might see the light of God, . . . on your
nostrils, that you might be aware of the odor of the sweetness of Christ, . . .
on your mouth, that you might speak the words of life”); soon afterward, he
prayed, “. . . omnem caecitatem cordis ab eo (ea) expelle . . . et ad suavem odorem
praeceptorum tuorum laetus (-a) tibi in Ecclesia tua deserviat” (“. . . drive away all
blindness from his (her) heart . . . and may he (she) serve you in your Church,
made joyful by the sweet odor of your commandments”); after the salt was
blessed, the priest said to the catechumen, “Accipe sal sapientiae” (“Receive the
salt of wisdom”) and prayed, “. . . hoc primum pabulum salis gustantem, non diu-
tius esurire permittas, quo minus cibo expleatur caelesti” (“. . . may You no longer
allow the one tasting this food of salt for the first time to hunger or to be satis-
fied with anything less than heavenly food”); later in the ceremony, the priest
placed his hand on the head of the one to be baptized and prayed, “. . . ut dign-
eris eum (eam) illuminare lumine intelligentiae tuae” (“. . . that you might deign to
enlighten him (her) with the light of your understanding”); shortly afterward,
touching the ears and nostrils of the baptizand with saliva, he declared, “Eph-
pheta, quod est, Adaperire . . . In odorem suavitatis” (“Ephpheta, that is, be opened
. . . In the odor of sweetness”) (Rituale Romanum [New York: Benziger, 1953], 26,
27–28, 29, 40, 42); except for the initial signing of the senses, all these rites were
also part of the baptism of infants (11–12, 12–13, 14, 15).
3. In actual fact the doctrine of the spiritual senses tends to

be emphasized in Western mysticism especially in the traditions
of St. Augustine and St. Bonaventure and precisely where there
is most emphasis on the Sacred Humanity of Christ. In this tradi-
tion we find “The Presence of Christ the Spouse is the proper
object of contemplation and each of His perfections is the particular
object of one of the spiritual senses” ({Olphe-Galliard,} art. cit.).204
Hence the spiritual senses flourish in “bridal mysticism,” and
especially in reference to the kiss of the Spouse, mystical embraces,
wounds of love. The full flowering of the spiritual senses comes in
participation in the sufferings of Christ and in stigmatization
which is miraculous, involves the body, and {is} peculiar to Western
mysticism. This aspect of mysticism tends therefore towards the
miraculous and “extraordinary.”
4. In the West, there is a tendency for theologians who are
not themselves mystics, in reaction against genuine but apophatic
mysticism, to overemphasize the spiritual senses. Cardinal Peter
D’Ailly, reacting against Ruysbroeck and the Rhenish mystics,
wrote a whole treatise based on “spiritual senses.”205 This tends
towards complication and rationalization. The spiritual senses be-
come materialized. The “spiritual senses” are objectified as new
entities “grafted on to the theological virtues and the gifts of the
Holy Spirit.”206 They are systematically categorized and labelled:
spiritual light = a perfection of faith and gift of understanding;
taste and touch {are} associated with charity and {the} gift of
wisdom; smell and hearing—no doubt there are some fantastic
attempts to fit in “spiritual smell” with hope?
5. Poulain is one of those who has made the spiritual senses
absolutely central in his doctrine on mysticism. After having
distinguished ordinary and mystic prayer, the latter beginning
with the prayer of quiet, he distinguishes mystical prayer by its
204. Olphe-Galliard, “Sens Spirituels,”187.

205. According to Olphe-Galliard (“Sens Spirituels,”190), thirteen chapters
of Compendium Contemplationis.
“fundamental characteristics” (see especially chapters 5 and 6).207

These characteristics he divides into principal and subsidiary. The
principal characteristics of mystical prayer according to Poulain
are: (1) the “felt presence of God”;208 (2) the interior possession
of God by the interior senses. The subsidiary characteristics:209
{the} mystical union or act is independent of our own will; {it}
gives a knowledge of God that is obscure or confused; {it} is
partially incommunicable; {it is} not produced by reasoning or
by the consideration of sensible images or of creatures; {it} varies
in intensity; {it} involves less effort than meditation; {it is} ac-
companied by sentiments of repose, love, suffering, etc.; {it} ef-
ficaciously inclines {the} soul to different virtues; {it} acts upon
the body and is acted upon by the body in return; {it} impedes
certain interior acts (ligature).210 Remarks: in general, if we take
into account what Poulain says about “ligature” and about the
obscurity of mystical prayer, we can see that there are elements
in this which tend to preserve the apophatic quality of mystical
prayer. However, the fact that he places all the emphasis on the
felt presence of God and on possession of God by the spiritual
senses seems to be regrettable and likely to create a completely
wrong idea of the real nature of mystical prayer. In speaking of
the felt presence of God Poulain is evidently trying to contrast it
with an intellectual and abstract knowledge of God. But the
words “felt presence” are inadequate and misleading. Poulain
does take into account the fact that there is a mystical prayer
in which God is experienced only as “absent”—i.e. in the Two
Nights.211
The spiritual senses according to Poulain:
207. Poulain, 64–113.

208. Poulain, chapter 5: “First Fundamental Character of the Mystic Union:
God’s Presence Felt.”
209. Poulain, chapters 7-14: Ten Subsidiary Characteristics (114–99).
210. Poulain, chapter 14 (178–99).
211. Poulain, chapter 15 (200–19).
a) He makes clear that they have nothing to do with the

ordinary exterior or interior sense; {it is} not a matter of
imagination.212
b) They are intellectual and direct perceptions of “the existence
of other beings”213 (God and angels) on a spiritual and mystical
level. They are an “angelic type of intuition”;214 analogously akin
to the external senses, they perceive the presence of God (always
of course as object).
c) The sense of touch belongs to the lower degrees of mystical
prayer. The sense of sight operates only in the highest level of
mystical prayer. The sense of spiritual touch gives a “sensation
of imbibition or immersion”215 in God. (The expression is a typical
barbarism. It probably would be better to render it in the less of-
fensive but more vague “oceanic feeling,” which is used by psy-
chologists and which Freud asserted he “never had”216—though
the oceanic feeling is not necessarily mystical.) Spiritual touch
212. Poulain, 88.

213. Poulain, 88 (not a direct quotation).
214. Cf. Poulain, 88–89 n.
215. Poulain, 91: “a sensation of imbibition (saturation), of fusion, of im-
mersion.”
216. In the opening pages of Civilization and Its Discontents (trans. James
Strachey [New York: W. W. Norton, 1961]), Sigmund Freud describes the “feel-
ing as of something limitless, unbounded—as it were, ‘oceanic’” described in a
letter from a friend (identified in a note [12] as Romain Rolland, writing on De-
cember 5, 1927), who commented, “One may . . . rightly call oneself religious
on the ground of this oceanic feeling alone, even if one rejects every belief and
every illusion” (11); Freud goes on to remark, “I cannot discover this ‘oceanic’
feeling in myself” (12). In a December 26, 1961 letter to Jeanne Burdick, Merton
wrote, “Freud did not think much of a mysticism which was described as ‘an
oceanic feeling’ and I think in a way he was rather right in his suspicion of it,
though he was a great old puritan that man! Oceanic feeling is not something
that has to be rejected just because it might suggest a danger of narcissism. But
pure love, disinterested love, is far beyond the reach of narcissism and I think
even old Freud would have caught on that this was an equivalent of mature and
oblative love in the ordinary psychophysical sphere” (Hidden Ground of Love,
110).
“can become an embrace”217—i.e. “sudden and affectionate clasp-

ings”218 take place.
Poulain does well to emphasize the existence and reality of
the spiritual senses, but his treatment tends to objectify and to
materialize them, and therefore it is misleading. It would be fatal
for directors to systematically seek out manifestations of each
spiritual sense in order to determine whether or not they were
dealing with “a mystic” (!!).
M. {Olphe-Galliard} (Études Carmélitaines, art. cit.): while ad-
mitting the pitfall of oversystematization into which theologians
of the present day fall when treating this subject, he does little
to simplify his ontological explanation of the spiritual senses:219
they are gratuitous gifts working in the spiritual organism ani-
mated by grace; they are virtually contained in baptismal justi-
fication (true, see {the} rite of baptism); they are “grafted on to
the virtues and gifts” (!!) (and I suppose they are suspended from
the fruits and beatitudes). They are not habits or faculties but
special acts of perfected habits, etc., etc. This kind of theology
explains little. It easily degenerates into pure verbalism. However
M. {Olphe-Galliard} is more helpful and illuminating when he
distinguishes between the spiritual senses which are related to
the intellect and those which are related to the will 220 (though we
will see this psychological approach is also unsatisfactory). Those
senses that perfect an act of the intellect attain to God mediately,
that is to say, through an interior effect: in aliquo effectu interiori221—
217. Poulain, 108.

218. Poulain, 85.
219. Olphe-Galliard, “Sens Spirituels,” 185–86: it should be noted that he
is presenting St. Bonaventure’s teaching on the spiritual senses here.
220. Olphe-Galliard, “Sens Spirituels,” 186, summarizing Karl Rahner,
“La Doctrine des Sens Spirituels au Moyen Âge, surtout chez S. Bonaventure,”
Revue d’Ascetique et de Mystique, 14 (1933), 263–99.
221. “in aliquo effectu interiori cognoscitur [Deus]” (“God is known in some
interior effect”) (Olphe-Galliard, “Sens Spirituels,”188, quoting Bonaventure, II
Sent, D. 23, a. 2, q. 3 [Opera Omnia, 2:544]).
so for instance sight and taste (through the dulcedo222 of the divine
presence, or of love, apprehended as an effect of His invisible
presence). (Yet he has previously referred taste to charity and
wisdom.223) Those that are perfective of love attain to God directly
and without medium of any effect. They operate in ecstasy. Thus
especially spiritual touch: it reduces the intelligence to silence; it
brings into play the apex affectus224 (this {is} important for spiritual
sensitivity and contact with God—cf. also called scintilla animae,
synderesis, etc.); in the action of spiritual touch, love and knowl-
edge are one; the experience of God is obscure; it is an amplexus
without any intelligible species.225 This last description is of value
especially because it coincides with the descriptions given by the
Cistercian Fathers, and in particular William of St. Thierry.226 It
also fits in well with the doctrine of Gregory of Nyssa. This theory
is evidently the opposite of Poulain’s, for Poulain says that the
spiritual sense of touch comes into play in ordinary mystical ex-
perience of the lower levels, and sight (“intellectual vision”) de-
velops only in ecstasy. There is not much point in arguing about
it, because it is simply a matter of following different texts of
various authors and attempting to systematize and categorize.
There is no hierarchy of spiritual senses, at least none that is
strictly definable. There is some point in distinguishing those
which attain to God mediately and those which attain to Him
immediately. (How valid is this distinction?) The lesson of this
is that the doctrine of the spiritual senses when it is expressed in
scholastic or phenomenological terms is confusing and inconclu-
sive. And it is especially unfortunate that the doctrine gets lost
in psychology.
222. “sweetness” (Olphe-Galliard, “Sens Spirituels,”189).

224. “the high point of the spirit” (Olphe-Galliard, “Sens Spirituels,”188).
225. “embrace” (Olphe-Galliard, “Sens Spirituels,”188).
226. See William’s Commentary on the Song of Songs (PL 180, cols. 490C,
490D, 506C, 507C, 512A).
What about another approach? Don Anselm Stolz (Théologie

de la Mystique, 231 ff.)227 opposes and corrects Poulain’s theory:
1) Poulain’s theory is plausible, but as far as the spiritual
senses go, the genuine traditional view is that the spiritual senses
are a restoration of man’s (innocent) sensibility which has been
materialized by original sin (p. 231).228
2) With the loss of man’s first state of grace our sensibility
was limited to sense objects, whereas before it participated, in its
own mode, with the Spirit’s mystical union with God—hence in
the paradisiacal state the whole man, sense and spirit, enjoyed
mystical union with God.
3) The Holy Spirit, by ascetic purification, regains control of
the whole man. Hence the exercise of the spiritual senses is not
a matter of an extraordinary psychological act, nor is it a matter
of special spiritual senses in the soul which are opposed to the
bodily senses, but rather an exercise of the spiritualized senses on a
mystical level.
This view has the advantage of being perfectly in accord
with the mystical theology of the Oriental Church. The Greeks
take an entirely different approach from that we have discussed
in Poulain and {Olphe-Galliard}. They do not try to account for
mystical apprehensions by pointing to the senses; rather they try
to account for the share of the senses in mystical experience. Mysti-
cal experience is spiritual, and it reaches the senses in a spiritual
way through and in the spirit. The “spiritual senses” are thus the
senses themselves, but spiritualized and under the sway of the
spirit, rather than new spiritual faculties. {See} Gregory Palamas,
The Defense of the Holy Hesychasts (tr. in French by Meyendorff 229):
“That which takes place in the body coming from the soul filled
227. ET: 211-12.

228. ET: 211.
229. Grégoire Palamas, Défense des Saints Hésychastes, ed. and trans. Jean
Meyendorff, 2 vols. (Louvain: Spicilegium Sacrum Lovaniense Administration,
1959); on March 3, 1961 Merton mentions that this is his “Lenten book” for this
year (Turning Toward the World, 98).
with spiritual joy, is a spiritual reality even though it is active in

the body” (Meyendorff I:334-5).230 “The spiritual joy that comes
from the spirit into the body is not at all corrupted by communion
with the body, but transforms the body and makes it spiritual”
(id.). Such spiritual activities do not carnalize the spirit but “deify
the body” (id. 342-43).231 One should study in detail this passage
(342-343-344-345). In justice to Poulain we might remark that his
observation on the interaction of body and spirit in mystical ex-
perience is related to this, but the perspective is quite different.
Spiritual Senses in St. Gregory of Nyssa. Origen’s teaching on
the spiritual senses plays a central part in the doctrine of Gregory
of Nyssa. The first thing that is notable about this is that the res-
toration of the spiritual senses is a return to man’s paradisiacal state
(cf. Stolz232). Here we find the basis of the whole Oriental doctrine.
However this return is a matter of mortification of the bodily
senses. In the De Virginitate {we read}: “We must become again
what the first man was . . . . A stranger to the pleasures of sight
and taste, he found his delight in the Lord alone. Hence renounc-
ing the illusions of sight and taste we must cling to the only true
good”;233 and again: “It is not by using the ordinary faculty of
hearing that the spirit comes to hear the celestial music, but by
rising above the carnal senses and ascending to the heights it
perceives the harmony of the heavens.”234 From these texts it is
clear that the senses are certainly spiritualized by ascetic purity
and by the life of virginity.
One might add, the liturgy has a great part to play. The con-
nection between virginity of spirit and the renewal of the spiritual
230. Triad II.2.9.

231. Triad II.2.12.
232. Stolz, 231; ET: 211; see also Daniélou, Platonisme et Théologie Mystique,
222–24.
233. PG 46, col. 374C (c. 13), quoted in Daniélou, Platonisme et Théologie
Mystique, 224.
234. In Psalmos, c. 3 (PG 44, col. 440D), quoted in Daniélou, Platonisme et
Théologie Mystique, 227.
senses is therefore essential. Stolz may be right when he says that

the spiritual senses are the ordinary senses on a higher and spiri-
tual level, rather than essentially different faculties in the intellect
alone. However this is not absolutely clear in Gregory of Nyssa.
The point should be studied further.
Daniélou, commenting on Gregory of Nyssa’s teaching,235
points out that:
a) the doctrine of the spiritual senses is not taken up by the
Dionysian tradition;
b) the presence of the doctrine of the spiritual senses in
Gregory {of} Nyssa together with his apophatic theology means
that he unites in himself the Biblical and Platonic traditions, the
apophatic tradition of Dionysius and John of the Cross, with the
cataphatic tradition of Diadochos and St. Bernard.236 This con-
fronting of apparently “opposed” traditions, even when they are
“united” in an exceptional figure, is not always satisfactory. The
oppositions can be accepted with reserve, but whole doctrines
must not be built on them (cf. what we shall have to say below
about the thesis of “Western mysticism”237).
The awakening of the spiritual senses belongs to an ad-
vanced stage of the spiritual life. For Origen they awaken gradu-
ally one after another and the teleios238 is one in whom they are
all awake. Not only active purification is required but also passive
purification (trial, the “desert”). Daniélou239 contrasts “sun mys-
tics” like Origen and St. Augustine, in whom the spiritual senses
of vision and taste are most obvious, and mystics of night, like
St. John of the Cross and Gregory {of} Nyssa, in whom other
senses are most important. In St. John of the Cross it is above all
the sense of touch. In St. Gregory of Nyssa, the spiritual sense of
235. Daniélou, Platonisme et Théologie Mystique, 222–52.

236. Daniélou, Platonisme et Théologie Mystique, 224.
237. Pages 168–70.
238. “the perfected one.”
smell is important,240 {exemplifying the} oriental tendency to

speak of God perceived as a perfume or spiritual fragrance in
darkness (cf. also St. Teresa of Avila, quoted by Poulain241). In
“divine darkness” God is perceived as fragrance, tasted as sweet-
ness, “touched” in existential contact. But we must always re-
member that for St. Gregory of Nyssa and St. John of the Cross
these experiences are of God beyond experience, in “unknowing,”
and we should never grasp the experience for its own sake. “For
him there is no vision of God but only an experience of the pres-
ence of God; that is to say, God is grasped as a person in an exis-
tential contact, beyond all intelligence and finally in a relation of
love.”242 In Gregory the progress is then from light to darkness,
as it is also in St. John of the Cross, rather than a progress from
darkness to light as in Origen and Evagrius, etc. Daniélou points
out that this is more real, and existential knowledge of God be-
yond knowledge and beyond light is the very essence of mystical
theology.243 (The biblical basis for this is found in Deuteronomy
4:12 ff., Exodus 33.)
In resumé, then: Poulain, following the mystics of light, tends
to say that sight is at the top of a supposed hierarchy of spiritual
senses. But actually the mysticism of light tends to be light in its
exposition. The reality of the mystical experience is expressed in
terms of light when there is need to communicate it to others.
Hence what is operative here is not always the “spiritual sense of
vision” but rather perhaps more often than we realize the literary
choice of metaphors of light. Those who use the language of night
and darkness not only remain more faithful to their experience
but also communicate it in a way that is perhaps baffling but
nevertheless more accurate. This is not to say that there are not
many mystics who actually experience God in a most positive

241. Interior Castle, Fourth Mansion, 2.6; Sixth Mansion, 2.14, quoted in
Poulain, 112–13.
way as light. The apophatic mystics themselves are definite about

the positive light that they perceive negatively in darkness. It is
a true light, not seen by the senses of the body, but by the spiritual
senses of the soul. Hence it is seen “in darkness,” yet the light
seen in darkness is at the same time “brighter than any other light”
and indeed it blinds “by excess of light.” Hence, in the terms of
St. John of the Cross, he who sees a light (directly and positively)
has not seen the true light, but something far below it.
Texts from St. Gregory of Nyssa: commenting on the Canticle,
obviously the sense of touch is primary: “Osculetur me osculo oris
sui.”244 If these are the opening words of the Canticum Mysticum,
there is certainly a definite significance in the fact. St. Gregory
says: “There is a certain touch of the soul by which it touches the
Word . . . by a certain incorporeal contact which falls under the
understanding. . . . The odor of the divine ointments is not
sensed by the nostrils but by the intelligence, and by any immate-
rial virtue.”245 (He says the divine names leave a faint trace of the
fragrance of God as He really is, like the trace of perfume in an
empty container.) The soul does not really touch the Word Him-
self, but traces and illuminations of Him which are accessible to
our intelligence. Here the contact with God is mediate. In dark-
ness, “the Spouse is surrounded by divine night in which the
Bridegroom approaches without showing Himself . . . but in
giving the soul a certain sentiment of His presence while avoid-
ing clear knowledge” (Hom. XI in Cant.).246 This appears to be
direct and existential apprehension of the presence of the Word
rather than of the Word as He is in Himself. Light and darkness
are one—lampros gnophos: “shining darkness.”247
244. “Let him kiss me with the kiss of his mouth” (Cant. 1:1).
245. PG 44, col. 780D, quoted in Daniélou, Platonisme et Théologie Mystique,
225–26.
246. PG 44, col. 1001B, quoted in Histoire de Spiritualité, vol. 1, 437; ET:
363.
247. De Vita Moysis, 2.163 (PG 44, col. 377A), quoted in Histoire de Spiritu-
alité, vol. 1, 437; ET: 363.
Religious knowledge starts out as light [the burning bush]

when it first appears: for then it is opposed to impiety,
which is darkness, and this darkness is scattered by joy
in the light. But the more the spirit in its forward progress
attains by a greater and more perfect application to the
understanding of the realities, and comes closer to contem-
plation, it realizes that the divine nature is invisible. Having
left behind all appearances, not only those perceived by the
senses but also those which the intelligence believes itself
to see, the spirit enters more and more into the interior until
it penetrates, by its striving, even unto the Invisible and the
Unknowable, and there it sees God. The true knowledge of
Him that it seeks and the true vision of Him consists in see-
ing that He is invisible, because He transcends all knowl-
edge, and is hidden on all sides by His incomprehensibility
as by shadows (De Vita Moysis II:162 ).248
(Compare St. John of the Cross, Ascent II:3, 4; vol. I, p. 70 ff.249)
V. Evagrius Ponticus—the “Prince of Gnostics”

A. The Problem of Evagrius. Evagrius of Pontus is one of the
most important, the least known (till recently), the most neglected
and the most controversial of Christian mystics. He merits, with
Gregory of Nyssa, the title of “Father of Christian Mystical The-
ology.” He was an Origenist and the greatest of the theologians
of Egyptian monachism at the end of the fourth century when
248. PG 44, cols. 376D–377A, quoted in Histoire de Spiritualité, vol. 1, 436–

37; ET: 363–64.
249. In these chapters St. John explains “that, for the soul, this excessive
light of faith which is given to it is thick darkness, for it overwhelms that which
is great and does away with that which is little, even as the light of the sun over-
whelms all other lights whatsoever” (70), supporting his statement by scriptural
references, including the pillar of cloud in Exodus, which “was full of darkness
and gave light by night,” just as “faith, which is a black and dark cloud to the
soul . . . should with its darkness give light and illumination to the darkness
of the soul” (72–73).
Cassian visited Scete. Being a confirmed intellectualist with very

complex and abstruse theories, he frightened the simple-minded
monks and clerics of his time in the desert.
The Reputation of Evagrius: Evagrius enjoyed great influence
in his lifetime. His doctrine persisted after his death and influ-
enced some of the most important theologians in the West as well
as in the East. The paradox is that those who used him, whether
knowingly or otherwise, ascribed his teachings to someone else
whose name was more “acceptable.” For the name of Evagrius
became mud, or worse. He fell with the Origenists and was exe-
crated by the enemies of Origen.
Against Evagrius: the Greek and Latin Churches as a whole
were against Evagrius. Moschus, in the Pratum Spirituale,250 re-
cords the legend that Evagrius’ cell at Scete was haunted by a
devil. The story was told that Evagrius was in hell among the
heretics. St. John Climacus,251 while being strongly influenced by
the Evagrian teachings, nevertheless condemns Evagrius by
name. St. Maximus has been proved by Viller (RAM, April 1930
ff.252) to be clearly a disciple of Evagrius. He is not only full of
Evagrian doctrines but can be said to base his teaching on Evagrius.
However the teachings are ascribed to others. Modern scholars,
while admiring him, still do not praise him without qualification.
Von Balthasar calls him “Buddhist rather than Christian.”253
Though Evagrius speaks often of contemplation of the Trinity,
von Balthasar and Hausherr254 maintain that this is purely verbal
250. John Moschos, The Spiritual Meadow, trans. John Wortley, CS 139 (Ka-
lamazoo, MI: Cistercian Publications, 1992), 146–47, 18.
251. St. John Climacus, The Ladder of Divine Ascent, trans. Archimandrite
Lazarus Moore, 14:12 (New York: Harper & Brothers, 1959), 141.
252. See note 46 above.
253. Hans Urs von Balthasar, “Metaphysik und Mystik des Evagrius Pon-
ticus,” Zeitschrift für Aszese und Mystik, 14 (1939), 39 (see Histoire de Spiritualité,
vol. 1, 457; ET: 381); this article is now available in English: “The Metaphysics
and Mystical Theology of Evagrius,” Monastic Studies, 3 (1965), 183–95.
254. Irénée Hausherr, Les Leçons d’un Contemplatif: Le traité de l’Oraison
d’Evagre le Pontique (Paris: Beauchesne, 1960), 98–99.
and that by “Trinity” he just means “God”—that his mysticism

is not fully Trinitarian. Bouyer defends Evagrius on this and on
other points.255
For Evagrius: The Arabian and Syrian Christians, who were
less affected by the Origenist conflict and its passions, had no
reason to hate Evagrius. Hence they continued to praise him and
to admire him. It is through the fact of his survival in Syrian
manuscripts that he has come to light again in our time. The
Syrian texts have established conclusively that the great works
on Prayer etc. are really his and not to be ascribed to anyone else.
Isaac of Nineveh (Nestorian mystic and bishop) calls Evagrius
the “Prince of Gnostics”—“the wise one among the saints” and
“the Blessed Mar Evagrios.”256 When works of Isaac, quoting
Evagrius favorably, were translated into Greek, the name of
Evagrius was suppressed and names of accepted writers like
Gregory Nazianzen would be substituted for it. L. Bouyer is the
most outspoken advocate of Evagrius at the present moment.
Life of Evagrius: born at Ibora on the Black Sea, {he} went to
Constantinople, then fled from the temptations of the city. {He}
went to Cappadocia, was a friend of Basil and the two Gregories,
was introduced by them to the writings of Origen, and to the mo-
nastic life. {He} was ordained deacon either by Basil or Gregory
{of} Nyssa. {He} went on to Jerusalem where he was in contact
with St. Melania and the Origenist Rufinus. He became a monk at
Scete under St. Macarius, lived in the “desert of {the} cells,” and
died on the feast of the Epiphany {in} 399, just before the outbreak
of the great Origenist conflict which ruined his reputation.
Rediscovery of Evagrius: the most widely read work of
Evagrius, in which there is nothing heretical (he is not a heretic),
is the De Oratione, which was so popular and so influential that
255. Histoire de Spiritualité, vol. 1, 469-70; ET: 392.

256. See Isaac of Nineveh, Mystic Treatises, trans. A. J. Wensinck (1923; Wi-
esbaden: Sändig, 1969): “the sage among the saints, Mar Euagrius” (72); “the
blessed Euagrius” (297, 306, 333, 345); “the holy Euagrius” (334); “one of the
holy Fathers, Euagrius, one of the initiated” (383).
it could not help but survive. Its authorship was simply ascribed
to another—“St. Nilus.” For centuries this treatise was read,
praised and used, and Evagrius exercised great influence as
“Nilus.” In 1912 Frankenberg257 discovered the works of Evagrius
that had been preserved in Syriac. {In} 1923, the Evagrios Studien
of {Bousset}258 drew attention to Evagrius. The most important
and difficult work of Evagrius, the Kephalaia Gnostica, preserved
in Syriac, has been re-edited in a better version, with a French
translation, in 1958.259 Fr. I. Hausherr, sj of the Pontifical Oriental
Institute proved definitively that the De Oratione was by Evagrius,
and twice presented studies and translations, commentaries, of
this work in the RAM, first in 1934 and then in l959.260 This has
finally appeared in book form {in} 1960.261 The Selecta in Psalmos,
hitherto ascribed to Origen, in PG 12, were restored to Evagrius
by H. von Balthasar.262 M. Viller, sj showed the influence of
Evagrius on the teaching (perfectly orthodox) of St. Maximus the
Confessor (RAM, 1930 f.). Some of the works of Evagrius had
survived under his name in the PG 40, such as the Praktikos, the
Mirror of Monks, the Letter to Anatolios.263
257. W. Frankenberg, Evagrius Pontikus (Berlin: Weidmannsche Buchhan-

dlung, 1912).
258. Wilhelm Bousset, Apophthegmata: Studien zur Geschichte des ältesten
Mönchtums (Tübingen: Mohr, 1923) (Merton misspells the name as Bossuet, as
he does in Cassian and the Fathers).
259. Les Six Centuries des ‘Kephalaia Gnostica’ d’Évagre le Pontique, ed. An-
toine Guillaumont, Patrologia Orientalis, 28.1 (Paris: Firmin-Didot, 1958); this
edition includes the original Syriac and French translations for both text tradi-
tions of this work, in which each of the six centuries actually consists of only
ninety chapters; the so-called “Century Supplement” of sixty additional chap-
ters is, according to Guillaumont, actually a separate work, sometimes given the
title Chapters on Knowledge (5, n. 2).
260. See n. 45 above.
261. Les Leçons d’un Contemplatif.
262. Hans Urs von Balthasar, “Die Hiera des Evagrius,” Zeitschrift für
Katholische Theologie, 63 (1939), 86–106, 181–206 (see Histoire de Spiritualité, vol.
1, 457; ET: 381).
263. Cols. 1213–86.
The Teaching of Evagrius: the worldview of Evagrius is based

on Origen and has come down to us in Cassian. It is exactly the
philosophy behind the Instituta and the Collationes of Cassian.
Hence it runs through all medieval monasticism.
1. A primitive spiritual cosmos (paradisiacal) fell with man
into a state of sin and limitation (captivity). Matter has an inti-
mate connection with this fallen condition of the cosmos. Man’s
primitive state was a pure contemplation of the Trinity with an
intellect naked of all forms. He fell not only into attachment to
forms but to love of sensible objects for their own sakes.
2. The demons tempt man through matter, and keep him
enslaved to sense and passion.
3. Man’s life on earth is a struggle against the demons, in
which he attempts to evade their subtle temptations, to spiritu-
alize matter, beginning with his own body, and return to union
with God in a paradisiacal state, a life of “pure prayer” on a level
with the angels. Man must return by the way he fell. First he must
purify his body, his senses, his passions (praxis—active life), de-
taching himself from objects. Then he must spiritualize his
knowledge of created things in “natural contemplation” (theoria
physike). After that he must learn to contemplate spiritual beings.
And finally he must recover the contemplation of the Trinity without
forms and without images, from which he originally fell.
4. Evagrius does not simply despise the material world as a
Platonist—his view of it is essentially Christian. “The body is a
seed in relation to the wheat it will be [after the resurrection] and
so too this present world is a seed of the world that is to come
after it” (Kephalaia Gnostica II. 25).264 Man’s contemplative restora-
tion in Christ is necessary for the recapitulation of the entire
cosmos in Christ. The life of man is divided into active (praktike)
and contemplative (gnostike). The active life begins in faith and the
fear of God. This puts us on our guard against the temptations of
the devil, and we must grow at the same time in the discernment
264. Guillaumont, Six Centuries, 71.

of spirits and in self-discipline (egkrateia) through patience and

hope until we attain to freedom from passion, or apatheia. This is
the summit of the active life and is required before one can enter
into the truly spiritual and gnostic life of contemplation.
5. We must realize that for Evagrius the ascent to gnosis is
not just a matter of seeking one’s own spiritual purity. It is a re-
sponse to the will of God for the restoration of the cosmos to its
primitive state. God wills that all should come to the knowledge
of the truth, that is of Himself. Hence all should seek to ascend
to the purity of contemplation and the angelic life. The beginning,
faith and the fear of God, shows us what God asks of all.
6. Furthermore, the summit is not just gnosis but agape, love.
We shall see this later. Though there is indeed a strong emphasis
on the intellectual side of contemplation in Evagrius, it is not true
that he neglects the aspect of love.
7. The emphasis is not primarily on our own ascetic effort,
in a Pelagian sense. Rather it is a question of submission and co-
operation with God’s will. Obscure as God’s hidden judgements
may be, it is basic to Evagrius’ system that all that God wills tends
in some way or other to lead us to truth and to Him, if we correspond
with His will. The sufferings He sends us are remedies destined
for our purification and for our good. In all that happens He has
no other end than to bring us to contemplation and agape, so we
must accept all that He sends with gratitude and energetic
cooperation.
8. Prayer is the greatest of means of cooperating with the will
of God. Evagrius repeatedly insists that we should not pray for
our own will to be done or for our own desires to be fulfilled, but
that God’s will may be done—always in the perspective indicated
above: God wills our union with Him. We should especially pray
for our purification (1) from passions first of all (this is essential
to the active life); (2) from ignorance (this is essential to the lower
degree of the contemplative life); (3) from all temptation, darkness
and dereliction (the higher degree of {the} contemplative life).
9. Finally the man of prayer or gnostic should seek not only
his own purification but that of all men, especially men of prayer.
In this way he seeks first of all the Kingdom of God and His
justice.
The Active Life (praktike) in Evagrius: time does not permit a
detailed treatment of the asceticism of Evagrius. Suffice it to say
that beginning with faith and the fear of God it struggles against
the bodily passions as well as the more subtle spiritual passions,
and strives to attain to apatheia, which implies complete control
of the passions and is the summit of the active life.
The Question of Apatheia: this raises the question of apatheia—
is this a genuinely Christian notion? If it can be reconciled with
Christian teaching and doctrine, is it not still an extreme? Even
if we admit its practicability for some rare souls, should we admit
it as the logical term of the ascetic life for all? We must begin with
a real understanding of the meaning of the term. St. Jerome in his
Epistle 133 so grossly exaggerated the idea of apatheia which he
attributed to his Origenist adversaries, that he has brought it
unjustly under suspicion. It is not as bad as St. Jerome tries to
make us believe. (St. Jerome has never been suspected of attain-
ing to apatheia.) The letter of Jerome (133) is in fact directed against
the Pelagians and against their idea of apatheia and impeccability
which is certainly more extreme and less Christian than the ap-
atheia of Evagrius and Origen, or of Gregory of Nyssa. (Apatheia
is clearly stated to be the prerequisite for contemplation in Greg-
ory of Nyssa’s Homilies on the Canticle of Canticles.265) However
Jerome lumps them all together. And he makes a special attack
on Evagrius, with some very unchristian statements about his
adversaries St. Melania and Rufinus, who were reading Evagrius.
Jerome says Evagrius wrote to “her whose name of blackness
[Melania] signifies the darkness of perfidy, and edited a book
about apatheia . . . [a state] in which the soul is never moved by
any vice of perturbation, and that I may state it simply, such a
soul becomes either a stone or a god. The books of this man are read
curiously in the East by the Greeks and in the West through the
265. See Daniélou, Platonisme et Théologie Mystique, 92–103.

translations of his disciple Rufinus. . . . ”266 The rest of the letter

is about the Pelagians. However, apatheia has had a bad press in
the West because of its associations with Pelagianism and stoicism.
Also, the Quietists misused the term. In general it can be said that
the common doctrine tends rather to follow St. Thomas,267 who
says that the passions are to be used and not reduced to complete
silence. This is certainly the better understanding of man’s condi-
tion and of his true vocation to go to God body and soul together.
However it is possible that this more moderate view is after all
not completely incompatible with Evagrius’ idea of apatheia.
Defense of Evagrius:
1) If we want to get a less extreme and more humane and
more practical notion of apatheia we can study the first Conference
of Cassian, where the puritas cordis given as the proximate end
of the monastic life corresponds exactly with the apatheia of
Evagrius.268 Note also Palladius in {the} Prologue to {the} Historia
Lausiaca269 contrasts apatheia with the activistic asceticism of some
monks who placed their confidence in heroic practices and did
not see that real ascetic purification must be achieved by peace,
tranquillity, interior liberty—all grouped together as apatheia. If
we translate apatheia as “insensibility” we will undoubtedly go
wrong and our concept will certainly end by being unchristian.
If we keep in mind that it means interior peace and tranquillity,
born of detachment and freedom from slavery to inordinate
266. PL 22, col. 1151.

267. Summa Theologiae, 1a 2ae, q. 24 a. 2, ad. 3, cited in G. Bardy, “Ap-
atheia,” DS 1, col 745.
268. See PL 49, cols. 485–90, and Merton’s discussion in Cassian and the
Fathers, 205–10.
269. See Bardy, col. 733–34, and Palladius, The Lausiac History, trans. Rob-
ert T. Meyer, Ancient Christian Writers [ACW], vol. 34 (Westminster, MD: New-
man, 1965), Prologue, 8: “For many of the brethren prided themselves on their
labors and almsgiving and boasted of their celibacy or their virginity; they had
every confidence in attention to divine prophecies and to acts of zeal, and still
they never attained a state of quietude” (25).
passions, we will be able to appreciate it better. Certainly it does

not have to mean the complete absence of all temptation, though
for Evagrius etc. it certainly seems to mean a habitual tranquillity
and freedom from temptation.
2) G. Bardy, writing in DS I:736, defends the idea of apatheia
as it is found in the Greek Fathers. “It is not a matter of insensibil-
ity towards God Whom one must love above all else, nor of in-
sensibility towards men, but of perfect liberty of spirit, perfect
abandonment as the fruit of renunciation, perfect detachment
from all things, humility, continual mortification and contempt
for the body. This is a very lofty doctrine in which apatheia is
brought back to human proportions, . . . and no longer has any
of the rigorousness which the stoics assigned to it.”270
3) Bouyer, in Histoire de Spiritualité (vol. 1, p. 462 f.)271 sums
up the case for Evagrius as follows:
a) Apatheia for Evagrius means control of all movements of
passion that are opposed to charity.
b) It implies deliverance from the demons who work on us
through the passions.
c) It liberates us and enables us to give ourselves completely
to the worship of God.
d) Far from being a matter of insensibility, it purifies and
elevates normal human sentiments.
e) It implies the ability to pray without distraction by cor-
poreal images or thoughts inspired by passion.
f) It does not imply impeccability or the absence of temptation.
One can still be tempted and one remains still subject to sin. But
the depths of one’s being are really fully committed to the love
of God and hence one would have to go against his inmost ten-
dencies in order to sin.
g) It brings a deep abiding peace to the depths of the heart
united to God’s will.
270. Bardy is referring here specifically to the De Oratione, 52 of Evagrius.

271. ET: 386–87.
h) Apatheia is not perfection. It still demands to be perfected

in contemplation and agape, which finally complete the total
purification.
i) Apatheia is ordered to gnosis and love. Love is the “excellent
state of the reasonable soul in which it is not able to love anything
corruptible more than the knowledge of God” (Kephalaia Gnostica
I.86).272
Comments: when the apatheia of Evagrius and the Greek Fa-
thers is interpreted in this favorable manner we can see that there
is nothing wrong with it at all except perhaps that it still presents
a certain danger—it can be misleading and this interpretation is
not the most obvious one to the average reader. However it is
certainly conformed to Christian ascetic tradition. What we ought
to retain from all this as a matter of pastoral concern {includes the
following}:
1. We ought to remember that there is no deep contemplative
life without a most serious ascetic purification. We must not under-
estimate this. We must not be satisfied with the initial sacrifices
required to bring one from the world to the monastery and to
monastic profession. The purification must continue. It is a life-
long work.
2. We must understand clearly however that ascetic purifica-
tion does not mean necessarily the use of very special, extraor-
dinary and heroic practices of bodily mortification. The emphasis
is on the end to be attained, which is interior peace. Cassian gives
the right principle to follow: practices are subordinated to purity
of heart. Those that enable us to attain to purity of heart are good.
Others, no matter how good or how necessary they may seem,
must be set aside if they stand in the way of purity of heart. (See
Conference 1.273)

273. PL 49, col. 487B (c. 5): “Quidquid ergo nos ad hunc scopon, id est, puri-
tatem cordis potest dirigere, tota virtute sectandum est; quidquid ab hac retrahit, ut
perniciosum ac noxium devitandum” (“Therefore whatever can direct us toward
3. It is not only legitimate but even desirable to think of the

term of ascetic purification as a state of peace and tranquillity due
to detachment and freedom from passionate drives that disturb
prayer. It is legitimate to expect that this kind of purification may
make a real life of prayer easy and simple. This concept of ap-
atheia, tranquillity, includes and goes beyond the idea of aban-
donment to God’s will. The monastic life should be so ordered
that monks not only “obey” and “abandon themselves” whatever
comes day by day, but also their daily life should be so ordered
that they are gradually freed from distracting concerns and agita-
tions that keep their minds in a whirl. They should live in an at-
mosphere of peace and quiet. This depends not only on their own
obedience but also on the general recollection and detachment
of the community and its life. Involvement in special activities,
even with a seemingly spiritual purpose, can make this tranquil-
lity impossible and frustrate the real end of monastic
asceticism.
B. The De Oratione of Evagrius (“St. Nilus”). We now turn
to Evagrius’ classical work on prayer which, in spite of his dis-
grace, continued throughout the Patristic and Middle Ages to be
a most powerful formative influence in Christian mysticism, at-
tributed to “Nilus.”
What is prayer? (Numbers in the following sections refer to
the chapters on prayer as given by Hausherr.) Prayer is defined
as a “homilia of the intelligence with God” (3).274 Homilia is equiva-
lent to conversatio, habitual intimacy; intelligence (nous) {is} there-
fore not of the affections only, and not of reasoning. This disposes
us to accept the idea of prayer that is immediate intuitive contact
with God, a habitual commerce with God, not a conversation in
words or thoughts. Prayer of petition is given an important place
in Evagrius. {He} also {focuses on} the attention with which we
this target, that is, purity of heart, should be followed with absolute commit-
ment; but whatever pulls us away from it, should be shunned as dangerous and
poisonous”).
274. Hausherr, Leçons, 16.
approach God and the reverence with which we address Him:

this is couched in terms resembling St. Benedict (see Hausherr,
p. 17—references will be given as far as possible to the newly
published: Hausherr, Les Leçons d’un Contemplatif [text of Evagrius
On Prayer] Paris, 1960.)
N. 60 is important: “If you are a theologian you will
truly pray. If you truly pray you are a theologian.”275 “Theo-
logian” for Evagrius means mystic, one who experiences the
things of God without intermediary. This state is not reached by
study but by purity of heart. It does not consist in scientific
knowledge about God, which can be possessed by the impure.
“The Kingdom of God is not in words but in power; power, here,
means the purity of the soul, and this comes from charity”
(Evagrius, Centuries276 V.26; Hausherr, p. 86).
N. 61: we begin to come close to “prayer,” he says, “when
the understanding, in ardent love for God, begins bit by bit to go
forth from the flesh, and casts aside all thoughts that come from
the senses, the memory, or the temperament, while at the same
time being filled with respect and joy.”277 {It is} important to
note:
a) The efficacy of love.
b) The setting aside of thoughts based on sense impressions
and natural experience.
c) Temperament, krasis, is explained by Hausherr278 to mean
the psycho-physical organism which, even when one has attained
to apatheia, can be worked on by the devil to produce visions. {It
would be} very interesting to study this further in the light of
Jung’s theory of archetypes, for instance. In any case, like St. John

276. This is the same work as the Kephalaia Gnostica; Hausherr is quoting
from the earlier, less authentic version edited by W. Frankenberg in Evagrius
Pontikus.—n.b. it is not found in S1, the text of this version in Guillaumont, Six
Centuries.
277. Hausherr, Leçons, 86–87.
of the Cross, Evagrius teaches we must rise above all forms based
on natural or preternatural experience.
d) The emptiness left by the absence of these experiences
and impressions is filled by holy awe and joy. (N.B. fear of the
Lord which is {the} beginning of wisdom, stressed by St. Chryso-
stom—see above.279)
Hence he can define prayer in n. 35 as “an ascent of the mind
to God.”280 We shall see later in detail what this means.
Psalmody and Prayer: meanwhile we can clarify our notion of
Evagrian prayer when we compare it with psalmody. The two are
distinct. Psalmody is not necessarily choral or public prayer. It is
vocal prayer. Psalmody belongs particularly to the active life. Not
only is it an exterior, quantitative exercise, but psalmody helps to
appease certain passions. The precise place of psalmody in the
ascetic life is to calm the passion of anger, and to appease the krasis
so that the devil cannot produce hallucinations. See nn. 83, 85:281
in 85 we see psalmody described as part of what he calls “multi-
form wisdom,”282 that is, the wisdom which deals with separate
manifestations of God in created things and events, which goes
from one object of thought to another, and from creatures to God,
which is occupied with the varied logoi of created things.
N. 87: both psalmody and prayer are charisms,283 special gifts
of God, and we must pray God insistently to receive them. {There
is} no illusion that psalmody is something easy and obvious and
that prayer alone is difficult. In a quote from Praktikos 1:6 (Haus-
herr, p. 115) we see a further development that gives us a better
perspective of the ascetic life: reading, watching and meditation
help to settle the wandering mind; fasting, labor and solitude
quiet the movements of concupiscence; anger is calmed by psalm-
279. Page 77 (but note that Chrysostom does not quote this verse).
281. Hausherr, Leçons, 115, 119.
ody, patience and pity. All these things must be used at the proper
times and in the proper measures, otherwise they do not have
their proper effect. In n. 82,284 the two special qualities of psalm-
ody are understanding and harmony (unison with other monks??).
Psalmody, having these qualities, joined to quiet, tranquil medita-
tive prayer, leads to apatheia—one becomes a “young eagle”285
soaring in the heights above the confusion and turmoil of the
flesh. This is a very wise traditional description of the exercises
of the “bios praktikos”286 and of the spirit in which they are to be
carried out.
Prayer, as contrasted with psalmody: prayer and psalmody
must go together as we have just seen. Psalmody is oriented to
the control of the body, the emotions, the passions. Prayer “leads
the intelligence to exercise its proper activity” (83).287 This proper
activity of the intelligence is to see creatures in the light of God
(lower level of contemplation, where prayer and psalmody have
more or less the same object, multiform gnosis) or God Himself
in the light of the Trinity. However, prayer alone is truly worthy
of the dignity of the intelligence. To have psalmody without
prayer would be to lead a life unworthy of the spirit of man.
Psalmody demands to be fulfilled in contemplation without im-
ages. If it is not so fulfilled it remains frustrated and abortive,
according to Evagrius.
The Summit of prayer is prayer without distraction (34a).288 The
summit of the ascent of the mind to God is a state in which the
intelligence is illuminated by the Holy Trinity. Only the state of il-
lumination by the Holy Trinity, beyond all concepts and images,
can be called true prayer, says Evagrius (Cent. Suppl. 30, quoted
by Hausherr, p. 86). Hence, there can be no distractions in this

286. “the ‘practical’ or active life.”
288. Hausherr, Leçons, 52 (this verse is omitted in the PG text, hence the
“a”).
state of pure prayer. Obviously this is a mystical grace and not

something achieved by human efforts. (Pastoral note on distrac-
tions: obviously when in discursive prayer a man tries to exclude
one thought and replace it by another, in “multiform gnosis”289
he will often have a terrible struggle. Undistracted prayer is not,
in Evagrius’ terms, the ability to remain fixed on a thought or
feeling of experience of God, even on God’s presence. It is the
resting in God’s own light, not by our own efforts, but by His
gift.) The state of undistracted prayer is variously called “the
state of understanding” (katastasis noos), “the state of prayer”
(katastasis proseuches) and theology, or gnosis of the Trinity.290
Hence theology for Evagrius is really an illumination without
reasoning, concepts, visions, images or anything of the sort.
The trials that come from the devil: there is a very important
element of diabolism in this work of Evagrius. The illusions,
hallucinations, temptations, and various assaults that take place
on the contemplative are ascribed to the devil, God’s adversary,
to whose interest it is to prevent the spiritualisation of man, the
divine image, and the glory of God fully resplendent in man. The
devil therefore does all he can to prevent a man from becoming
a true contemplative.
a) In the Kephalaia Gnostica (I.10),291 Evagrius points out that
some demons try to prevent us from keeping the commandments,
others from attaining to natural contemplation, others from at-
taining to contemplation of God. In Kephalaia Gnostica III.76, he
says, when we are formed in the womb we live as plants; when
we are born we live as animals; when we are grown up we live
as angels or as demons.292
b) We are never fully safe from temptation, even in apatheia.
{It is an} illusion to imagine or to hope for a state in which we will
289. See below, n. 342.

not be tempted. Even the perfect are tempted to impurity, espe-

cially in the imagination in the time of prayer (Hausherr, p. 123
f.). Evagrius adds that the demon of impurity does things to
monks that “cannot be related”293 for fear of scandalizing those
who do not know about it. This is an early reference to the prob-
lem of special impure temptations and accidents, a problem that is
never fully treated, only alluded to through the history of mysti-
cism. Note: Evagrius, accepting the usual tripartite division of the
soul,294 says the following: the epithumia is renovated and restored
by chastity; the thumos {by} love; the nous {by} contemplation.295
c) Special physical assaults of the devil, like those recorded
in the life of the Curé d’Ars,296 are described in nn. 91 ff. Not only
does the devil work on the mind and thoughts, but even admin-
isters physical violence, striving to produce terror. Special hints and
instructions are given so that the monk may be courageous and
inflexible. Evagrius in his Antirrheticos (“The Contradictor”) pres-
ents the monk with a manual, a collection of Scripture texts with
which to defy the devil, to shout him down, to drive him out and
treat him with contempt. It is practically a manual of exorcisms.
(Practical note: direct argument with the devil {is} not to be encour-
aged!) {It is} important to note what Evagrius has to say about
patience, humility, the help of the good angels, trust in God, etc.
d) Spiritual temptations: {these are} the ruses of the devil to
produce illusions of spiritual perfection. They try above all to
incite us to pride and vanity and self-love. They even pretend to
allow themselves to be defeated, in order that we may get a
swelled head and think ourselves saints (133, 134, 135, 136).297
293. Antirrhetikos, “Fornication,” 65, quoted in Hausherr, Leçons, 124.

294. See Plato, Phaedrus, 246a-256e, the famous image in which the rational
faculty (nous) is depicted as a charioteer that must control its two horses, the
spirited and appetitive faculties (thumos and epithumia); the same division is
also found in Book 4 of the Republic, 436–444, and in the Timaeus, 69b–70a.
295. Kephalaia Gnostica, III.35 (Guillaumont, Six Centuries, 111).
296. See Hausherr, Leçons, 126.
297. Hausherr, Leçons, 166–69.
They also tempt the saints to a sense of guilt: see Kephalaia Gnostica
III.90: they “calumniate the gnostic”298 in order to attract his mind
to themselves. When he strives to justify himself before them a
cloud overwhelms his mind and contemplation becomes
impossible.
e) False visions: the devil especially tries to destroy contem-
plation by producing false “forms” under which we imagine we
see God. When one has attained the height of prayer, then the
characteristic temptation is to consent to a vision of God under
some conceivable form. “They represent to the soul God under
some form agreeable to the senses in order to make it believe that
it has attained to the goal of prayer” (n. 72).299 The temptation is
thus to “localize God and take for the divinity a quantitative
object. . . . But God is without quantity or figure” (n. 67).300
These forms are produced by the action of the devil on the krasis
(n. 68) and again the result is {that} “the soul becomes habituated
to resting in concepts and is easily subjugated; this soul that was
going forth to immaterial gnosis without form, now lets himself
be deceived, taking smoke for the light” (68).301
These are very important chapters which may be compared
to some of the classical passages of St. John of the Cross in The
Ascent of Mount Carmel, for instance. The basic principle of St.
John of the Cross is {that} “no thing created or imagined can serve
the understanding as a proper means of union with God” (Ascent,
II.8).302 Read Ascent II.8, numbers 4 and 5:303 “It is clear, then, that
none of these kinds of knowledge can lead the understanding
298. Guillaumont, Six Centuries, 135; see also Hausherr, Leçons, 68, 159.
302. Peers, Complete Works of Saint John of the Cross, 1.94.
303. N. 4 (Peers, Complete Works of Saint John of the Cross, 1.95–96) declares
that imagination and understanding, dependent on the senses, cannot serve
as a proximate means to union with God; n. 5 (Peers, St. John, 1.96–97) states
that even a supernatural apprehension or understanding cannot be a proximate
direct to God; and that, in order to reach Him, a soul must rather
proceed by not understanding than by desiring to understand; and by
blinding itself and setting itself in darkness rather than by opening its
eyes in order the more nearly to approach the ray Divine” (Ascent, II.8,
n. 5).304 Re: imaginary visions, read Ascent, II.16, nn. 3, 6,305 and
especially the end of 9:
But there is none like My servant Moses, who is the most

faithful in all My house, and I speak with him mouth to
mouth, and he sees not God by comparisons, similitudes
and figures. Herein He says clearly that, in this lofty state
of union whereof we are speaking, God is not communi-
cated to the soul by means of any disguise of imaginary
vision or similitude or form, neither can He be so commu-
nicated; but mouth to mouth—that is, in the naked and
pure essence of God, which is the mouth of God in love,
with the naked and pure essence of the soul, which is the
mouth of the soul in love of God (Ascent, II.16, n. 9).306
The Assistance of the Good Angels: the devils try to impede our
prayer and create forms and images to keep us from God. The
good angels are no less active (n. 74 ff.). First they pacify the soul,
keep out distractions and diabolical interventions (74).307 Their
function is to prepare the way to the locus Dei,308 the interior
sanctuary of contemplation and gnosis. They protect us against
sleep, boredom, torpor (devils produce these). They stimulate us
means in this life to divine union, which is beyond understanding (as the quot-
ed concluding passage to this section points out).
304. Peers, Complete Works of Saint John of the Cross, 1.97 (emphasis added).
305. N. 3 (Peers, Complete Works of Saint John of the Cross, 1.131-32) states
that both God and the devil can present images to the soul without using the
outward senses; n. 6 (Peers, St. John, 1.132) emphasizes that the understanding
should not cling to these visions, whatever their source, and the soul should
remain detached from them.
306. Peers, Complete Works of Saint John of the Cross, 1.134.
308. “the place of God” (n. 57; Hausherr, Leçons, 80).
to more pure love for God, thus facilitating prayer. N. 81 reads:

“Know that the holy angels urge us on to pray and they remain
then at our sides, joyful and praying for us. If then we are negli-
gent and welcome alien {thoughts} we sorely grieve them, since,
while they are fighting so zealously for us, we do not even wish
to pray to God for ourselves, but despise their aid and abandon
God their Lord in order to go out to meet the impure demons.”309
(An echo of this {is found} in Cistercian tradition, the recording
angels in choir.310) Note that the good angels are always contem-
plating God and beings. They enjoy theoria physike uninterrupt-
edly; men have it sometimes, demons never (see Kephalaia Gnostica,
III.4311).
The Ascent of Prayer: “Prayer is an ascent of the mind to
God.”312 {The} outline of the bios theoretikos (see Kephalaia Gnostica
I.27313) {consists in}: {the} Kingdom of Christ (theoria physike) {in-
volves} multiple gnosis, {of} beings and their logoi: (a) providence;
309. Hausherr, Leçons, 113–14 (“thoughts” was inadvertently x’d out in the
typescript but restored in the mimeo).
310. See St. Bernard, In Cantica, 7.4–6 (PL 183, cols. 808A–809D), in which
Bernard identifies the friends of the Bridegroom to whom the Bride addresses
her request for “the kisses of his mouth” with “the holy angels who wait on us
as we pray, who offer to God the petitions and desires of men, at least of those
men whose prayer they recognize to be sincere, free from anger and dissension.
. . . Since they are all spirits whose work is service, sent to help those who will
be the heirs of salvation, they bear our prayers to God in heaven and return
laden with graces for us.” Like Evagrius, Bernard also warns his monks that if
they are negligent or asleep in choir, “instead of showing reverence for those
princely citizens of heaven you appear like corpses. When you are fervent they
respond with eagerness and are filled with delight in participating in your sol-
emn offices. What I fear is that one day, repelled by our sloth, they will angrily
depart. . . . It is certain indeed that if the good spirits withdraw from us, we
shall not easily withstand the obsessions of the evil ones” (Bernard of Clairvaux,
On the Song of Songs I, trans. Kilian Walsh, ocso, CF 4 [Kalamazoo, MI: Cister-
cian Publications, 1971], 40–41).
312. N. 35; Hausherr, Leçons, 53.
(b) divine judgements; (c) natural created beings; (d) angels; {the}
Kingdom of the Father (theologia) {involves} contemplation of the
Trinity in the locus Dei “without forms,”314 “without multiplic-
ity.”315 The Kingdom of Christ {provides} gnosis of the economy
of salvation and of the revelation of the Logos in creation and in
history. This is not the summit of the contemplative life, but an
intermediate stage, a further spiritual and intellectual purification
completing the work of the active life.
In the realm of theoria physike we are beyond all passionate
thoughts, and begin to go beyond simple thoughts to the logoi. These
remain multiple, objective, and formal—intuitive and not discur-
sive, however. These intuitions are mystical, given directly by
God, but they also presuppose or allow for our own cooperation
in disposing ourselves, not only by ascetic purity of heart but
also by assiduity in reading the Scriptures. Evagrius stresses the
fact that love is necessary for the gnosis of created beings (see
Kephalaia Gnostica III.58316). Theoria physike is insufficient. This is
stated categorically {in} n. 55: “The mere fact that one has attained
apatheia does not mean that one will truly pray, for one may re-
main with simple thoughts and be distracted in meditating on
them, and thus remain far from God.” 317 What are simple
thoughts? thoughts of objects that are completely innocent and
good, and free from all passionate attachment. But they are never-
theless “multiple” and also somewhat superficial, meaningless,
irrelevant. We are not yet in the realm of theoria physike strictly so
called, only on the threshhold. We are purified from simple
thoughts by a work of recollection and deepening—a new intuitive
seriousness which penetrates to the logoi of things. This deepening
by theoria physike, this grasp of the logoi, is the beginning of a
314. Centuries Supplement, 21 (Hausherr, Leçons, 94).

315. See J. Lemaitre, R. Roques, M. Viller, “Contemplation: III. Chez les
Grecs et Autres Orientaux Chrétiens: 1. Étude de vocabulaire,” DS 2, col. 1778:
“La Contemplation de la Trinité n’a rien de multiple.”
mature interior contemplation. But it is not yet the locus Dei or

the true interior sanctuary of prayer. N. 56 {states}: “Even if the
intelligence does not delay among simple thoughts, it does not
by that fact attain to the place of prayer: but it may remain in the
contemplation of objects and be occupied with their logoi which,
though they may be simple expressions, nevertheless, since they
are objects, impress a form upon the intelligence and keep it far
from God.”318 He says elsewhere (quoted by Hausherr, p. 145):
“He who contemplates God through the consideration of His
creatures does not see His nature but the economy of His wisdom,
and if this is the case, how great is the folly of those who pretend
that they know the nature of God.”319 N. 57 speaks of a further
stripping of the intelligence. It must ascend even beyond the
angels, though to reach the angels it must ascend above “nature”
and proceed in “nakedness without forms”;320 nevertheless there
is multiplicity in this angelic contemplation, and no doubt a sem-
blance of objectivity. It is the “gnosis of intelligibles,”321 and these
intelligibles are multiple. This particular point needs to be much
more thoroughly studied and clarified, and we do not dwell upon
it here. {It is} sufficient to say that the gnosis of spiritual beings
and of “intelligibles” is not yet enough and one must pass even
beyond this to pure emptiness and nakedness, to the locus Dei.
A qualification of this strict doctrine: what is said here must not
be misunderstood and taken in too strict and absolute a sense. It
is not a mere matter of purifying the intellect more and more so
that it is completely empty and without images. This concept of
prayer could in fact be disastrously misleading. God Himself
purifies our intelligence, and He does so not only by means of
gnosis, but also by love. Love remains an important force in the

319. Kephalaia Gnostica, V.51 (this is the less authentic version, accord-
ing to Gullaumont; the S2 text is somewhat longer [Guillaumont, Six Centuries,
198/199]).
320. See Kephalaia Gnostica, III.15 (Guillaumont, Six Centuries, 103).
321. Kephalaia Gnostica, I.70, 76 (Guillaumont, Six Centuries, 51, 53).
mysticism of Evagrius. Also, the mere fact that one has not at-
tained to absolute purity of intellect does not prohibit occasional
flashes of pure and perfect contemplation brought about by the
action of the Holy Spirit (n. 62).322 This short-cut is a matter of
love which cuts short reasoning and preoccupation with forms.
This fact should be remembered. It is easily forgotten when we
concern ourselves with the strict logic of the Evagrian ascent.
Such things do not obey the logic and forms of {a} rigid system,
and Evagrius himself knew it.
“Theology”—the locus Dei:323 in the first place, the concept of
a “locus Dei” is itself a deficiency or seems to be one, according
to Evagrius’ own standards. Is not this itself a quasi-form, a semi-
objective entity within ourselves? Is there not {a} danger that this
concept of a locus Dei may itself distract us? Of course the concept
is used in communication of what is in itself ineffable, hence the
imperfection. We must remain on guard.
a) The contemplation of the Holy Trinity is not multiple—the
“Three” are “not numerical.”324
b) Evagrius is here accused of being more philosophical than
theological and of using the “Trinity” as an expression of God as
monad. This needs to be studied more.
c) In any case the gnosis of the Trinity is true theology, and
it is a gift of light from God, immediate, without forms, perfect
in unity. {It is} without form: “The mind has all its strength when
in time of prayer it imagines nothing in this world” (Pract. 1.37).325
(This applies to theoria physike on {the} higher level—intelligibles.)

323. The phrase, taken from Psalm 75:3, is found in section 57 of the De
Oratione, and also in On Thoughts, cc. 39, 40, Reflections, cc. 20, 23, 25, Letter 39
and Scholia on the Psalms 75:3: see Evagrius of Pontus, The Greek Ascetic Corpus,
trans. Robert E. Sinkewicz (New York: Oxford University Press, 2003), 180, 213,
273, 286.
324. Kephalaia Gnostica, Cent. VI.10-13 (Guillaumont, Six Centuries, 221,
223), quoted in Hausherr, Leçons, 147–48.
“I call impressionless the intellect which at the time of prayer

imagines no bodily thing” ({the} same remark applies here) (In
Ps. 140). “The thought of God keeps the mind from all impres-
sions, for God is not a body” (In Ps. 140, quoted by Hausherr [p.
96]). Is this translation (of Hausherr) satisfactory? {It} implies a
concept of God. The emptiness of Evagrius would seem to de-
mand much more.
Two important numbers, for theology: n. 66 {states}: “See no
diversity in thyself when thou prayest, and let thy intelligence
take on the impression of no form; but go immaterially to the
immaterial and you will understand.”326 This by itself is not a full
explanation of pure prayer. It is not enough to be “immaterial”;
one must also be “beyond intelligibles.” Hence, Hausherr quotes
from Cent. Suppl. 21 (see p. 94): “having entered into prayer [the
intelligence] penetrates into light without form, which is the place
of God.” Note: this concept of the locus Dei within oneself is the
most serious flaw in the mystical theology of Evagius—not that
it is wrong in itself but it blocks further (ecstatic) development. It
explains union in such a way that it remains necessarily imper-
fect; God and the spirit remain face to face, so to speak, subject
and object. Even the locus Dei risks being regarded as “something”
objective. Also, in Cent. II.63 (quoted ibid.), it is said: “Among
various forms of gnosis, some are immaterial, some are known
in material objects. The gnosis of the Holy Trinity is beyond all
of them.”327 That is to say, it is beyond the material and the immate-
rial. This is important because we tend to imagine that it is suffi-
cient to ascend from the material to the intelligible. Also, note
that this transcendent quality of divine gnosis postulates once
again the activity of mystical love and not a mere intellectual light
alone. N. 114 {states}: “Aspiring to see the face of the Father Who
is in heaven, seek for nothing in the world to see a form or figure

327. The S2 text is completely different at this point (Guillaumont, Six Cen-
turies, 84).
at the time of prayer.”328 There is no need of a form to see God;

He gives us a light in which He is seen directly. Cent. I:35 is theo-
logically ambiguous, and the ambiguity will be resolved in a
characteristic way by later Byzantine mystics. However we re-
produce it as it stands: “Just as the light that shows us all has no
need of another light in order to be seen, so God, Who shows us
all things, has no need of a light in which we may see Him: for
He is Himself light by essence” (Hausherr, p. 145).329 It is to re-
solve this problem that the concept of the locus Dei is developed.
Rather than say that God is seen directly by His own light, which
would imply a participation in the beatific vision, it is said that
He is seen in the naked and light-filled intellect which mirrors Him
as a pure and perfect image. This pure intellect is itself the locus
Dei. The light of God received into the mirror gives us a direct
intuition of God in our own divinized intelligence. He also speaks
of the light “carving out in the soul the place of God”330 by puri-
fying it of every form. Elsewhere he has something about the
“sapphire light” 331 of the locus Dei. This is dangerous and
misleading.
Note the Beatitudes of Prayer: they praise the “formlessness”
and nakedness that we have discussed, but they also bring in the
element of love, and particularly of fraternal charity. The unity
produced by contemplation is not confined to individual union
of the monk with God—on the contrary, he who is purified by
apatheia and contemplation is perfectly one with all his brothers
because he is perfectly humble and pure. N. 118: Blessed is the
intelligence which, in a prayer without distraction, acquires ever
new increase of love for God.332 N. 119: Blessed is the intelligence

329. Both text traditions for this chapter are identical (Guillaumont, Six
Centuries, 32/33).
330. Praktikos, 1.70, quoted in Hausherr, Leçons, 81.
331. The phrase, taken from Exodus 24:9-11, is found in On Thoughts, c. 39,
and Reflections, c. 2: see Evagrius, Greek Ascetic Corpus, 180, 211.
which in the time of prayer becomes immaterial and naked of all

things.333 N. 120: Blessed is the intelligence which in the time of
prayer has obtained perfect imperviousness to the appeals of
sense.334 N. 121: Blessed is the monk who considers himself the
offscouring of all.335 N. 122: Blessed is the monk who regards the
salvation and the progress of all as his very own, in all joy.336 N.
123: Blessed is the monk who considers all men as God, after
God.337 N. 124: He is a true monk who is separated from all
[things] and united to all [men].338 This last is completed by an-
other saying of Evagrius from a letter (quoted by Hausherr, p.
158): “Christ is our charity and He unites our understanding
to our neighbor in apatheia by the true gnosis of the Holy
Trinity.”339
Conclusions:
a) Evagrius has been treated with harsh severity by many
authors, and yet he has been used by the greatest saints. There
are real riches in his doctrine.
b) It is true that he has a distinctly Platonic, or rather neo-
Platonist, tone. He is highly intellectual. He is always in danger
of a certain angelism, considering man as a potentially pure spirit,
isolating the intelligence from everything else, as if the contem-
plative life were a question of pure mind. He does not hold that
the body is evil. He says categorically that “nothing created by
God is evil” (Keph. Gnost. III.59).340
c) He tends to separate off the contemplative life and to iso-
late it from the wholeness of the Christian’s life in the Spirit.

339. Letter 40.
d) This tendency must not be exaggerated. His extreme state-

ments must be balanced by those others in which he insists on
love, and on unity in the mystical Christ, and the rare places
where he speaks of the action of the Holy Spirit.
e) It would seem right and proper to grant Evagrius the
benefit of the doubt and to say that the fullness of Christian
mystical theology is implicitly there but that he did not have a
theological language that was capable of making it perfectly clear,
{and} that his attachment to intellectualist terminology spoiled
his theology.
f) Evagrius does not go as far as the later ecstatic theologians.
He takes us out of all that is not the self, but not out of ourselves.
He takes us away from external objects to the locus Dei, but no
further than this.
g) There remains a considerable danger of misunderstanding
him. He is an interesting and important source, but in forming
young monks and in preaching the contemplative life it would
of course be much wiser to find the same things said much better
in great saints like Gregory of Nyssa, Maximus, etc.
VI. Contemplation and the Cosmos—Theoria Physike

The topic of theoria physike has already been mentioned. Let
us now treat it in detail because it is very important. We can in
fact say that the lack of theoria physike is one of the things that
accounts for the stunting of spiritual growth among our monks
today. On the contrary, where there is a genuine growth from the
serenity of at least a relative apatheia to the enriched state of gnosis
by “natural contemplation,” then we are fully and integrally
prepared for theologia without forms, beyond all ideas and sym-
bols. Note how the modern controversy about a distinction be-
tween “acquired” contemplation that is “dark and without
forms” and infused contemplation really obscures the essential
issue. There must in reality be a flowering of contemplation in
the realm of types, symbols, and logoi, in the gnosis of God’s
mercy, in His providence and in His judgements, before there
can be a normally mature development in the direction of pure

theologia.
What is theoria physike? Evagrius calls it the “land flowing
with milk and honey” (Kephalaia Gnostica III.67).341 It is a contem-
plation according to nature (physis). It is also a contemplation of
God in and through nature, in and through things He has created,
in history. It is the multiformis sapientia,342 the gnosis that appre-
hends the wisdom and glory of God, especially His wisdom as
Creator and Redeemer:
1) in the spirit of Scripture and not in the letter;
2) in the logoi of created things, not in their materiality;
3) in our own inmost spirit and true self, rather than in our
ego;
4) in the inner meaning of history and not in its externals
({the} history of salvation, {the} victory of Christ);
5) in the inner sense of the divine judgements and mercies
(not in superstitious and pseudo-apocalyptic interpretations of
events).
It is a contemplation to which we are led and in which we
are illuminated by the angels. It is a spiritual contemplation, a
gift, proceeding from love, accessible only to the pure, and es-
sentially distinct from the science of nature which is only intel-
lectual, and accessible to the impure as well as to the pure. It is
not only the crown of the active life and the beginning of the
contemplative life, but it also is necessary to complete the moral
purification effected by the active life. When the thumos and epi-
thumia have been ordered and purified by love and chastity, the
nous is purified by theoria.343 In this purification there is also a
transformation and deepening. What were merely “simple
thoughts” become penetrating intuitions of the logoi of things, in
preparation for a further step—the intuition of pure intelligibles.

342. “multiform wisdom” (Kephalaia Gnostica, I.43; II.2, 21; III.11; IV.7; V.84
[Guillaumont, Six Centuries, 39, 61, 69, 103, 139, 213]).
343. See above, n. 295.
Theoria gives a supernatural understanding of nature, of history,

of revelation, of liturgy and of man himself. It attains to this
understanding in types, symbols and logoi which are opened up
to us by the divine illumination, but also depend on our own
cooperation. Hence theoria physike is partly mystical and partly
natural. There is a manifest synergy of God and man in its action.
Man does not simply receive these illuminations passively. It is
always sustained by faith, or rather by a collaboration between
nature and faith: the logoi of creatures and the types of Scripture
are realities which nurture and preserve faith; faith feeds on these
“words of God.” They are a kind of angelic nourishment, without
which the intelligence fails and dies. In effect, the man who is
immersed in the letter of Scripture, the materiality of things, his
external self, the externals of history, is in fact completely blinded;
his intelligence is starved and shrivels up, and even if he is still
alive by “faith,” his faith is so languid and weak that it is perpetu-
ally on the point of death. His intelligence is deprived of vitally
important spiritual nourishment. How can such a one aspire to
a life of genuine contemplation? His contemplation will, if it ex-
ists at all, be a false illumination nourished by passion and sense
stimulation, and by the emotions. Theoria physike {is thus the}
reception of God’s revelation of Himself in creatures, in history,
in Scripture. “We must not believe that sin caused this unique
masterpiece which is this visible world in which God manifests
Himself by a silent revelation” (St. Maximus, Ambigua).344 Here St.
Maximus uses theoria physike to protest against the Origenist idea
that the world is in itself imperfect, being made up of fallen spiri-
tual realities. Theoria physike is necessary to correct the deviations
of Origenism, including those found in Evagrius.
St. Maximus, on whom we rely mostly here, is a great theo-
logian of the seventh century, the Father of Byzantine mysticism.
He died in 655. He used Evagrius but corrected him and went
beyond him. He used Pseudo-Dionysius but also corrected him
344. PG 91, col. 1328A, quoted in von Balthasar, Liturgie Cosmique, 17; ET: 61.
and went beyond him.345 {He is} one of the greatest of the Greek
Fathers. (Read Liturgie Cosmique by H. Urs von Balthasar.) St.
Maximus is the great doctor of theoria physike. He unites Plato
and Aristotle, within the Christian framework. He has the broad-
est and most balanced view of the Christian cosmos of all the
Greek Fathers, and therefore of all the Fathers. St. Maximus says
again: “There is in everything a general and unique mode of the
obscure and intelligible Parousia of the unifying cause” (Mysta-
gogia,346 quoted in Liturgie Cosmique, p. 25). He says again: “The
love of Christ hides itself mysteriously in the inner logoi of created
things . . . totally and with all His plenitude . . . in all that is
varied lies hidden He who is One and eternally identical; in all
composite things, He who is simple and without parts; in those
which have a beginning, He who has no beginning; in all the
visible, He who is invisible,” etc. etc. (Ambigua, 1285, 1288347).
Theoria physike is then:
a) Reception of the mysterious, silent revelation of God in
His cosmos and in the oikonomia, as well as in our own lives.
Note—this is not a question of epistemology, as it was for St. Au-
gustine. For Augustine (see Guardini, Conversion of Augustine, p.
13 ff.348), it was a matter of explaining how we know the essences
of created things. This knowledge of essences is not attained by
345. The second section of Liturgie Cosmique, “Les Idées,” focuses on

Maximus’ critique of Pseudo-Dionysius (71-80) and Origen (80-87); ET: 115–26,
127–36.
346. 7:91 (PG 91, col. 685AB); ET: 70.
347. Von Balthasar, Liturgie Cosmique, 222–23 (the references are to column
numbers in PG 91); ET: 292.
348. In his second chapter, entitled “The Memory,” Guardini finds Augus-
tine raising “epistemology’s basic problem: How is the essence—or aprioristic
character—of a thing to be grasped?” (12), and explains that “For Augustine, as
for Plato, all this comes, not by way of the senses, but directly from the eternal
ideas, of which the objects of experience and process are but images. . . . [T]he
mind constantly refers itself to that realm of ideas which, ultimately, is none
other than the living spirit of God. . . . The whole world, insofar as a man
encounters it and it has become the content of his life, exists twice: actually and
sense, but by “memoria,” for in his Platonic line of thought the

memoria is enlightened by God and perceives the reality of things
not just in themselves but in the Word. Contemplation of the logoi
of things is like this, but the perspective is different.
b) It is the knowledge of God that is natural to man, with
God’s help (grace). But note, it is not “natural” in the modern
sense, clearly distinct from and opposed to “supernatural.” It is
natural in the sense that it is what God intended for man in creat-
ing him. It is proper to him as a son of God, was his when in
paradise, is proper to him as a brother of the angels. We must be
restored first of all to this “natural” contemplation of the cosmos
before we can rise to perfect theologia.
c) This contemplation is demanded by the cosmos itself and
by history. If man cannot know creatures by this spiritual gnosis
they will be frustrated of their end. If man cannot spiritually
penetrate the meaning of the oikonomia it runs the risk of being
frustrated and souls will be lost.
d) Hence theoria physike is a most important part of man’s
cooperation in the spiritualization and restoration of the cosmos.
It is by theoria that man helps Christ to redeem the logoi of things
and restore them in Himself.
e) This theoria is inseparable from love and from a truly spiri-
tual conduct of life. Man not only must see the inner meaning of
things but he must regulate his entire life and his use of time and
of created beings according to the mysterious norms hidden in
things by the Creator, or rather uttered by the Creator Himself
in the bosom of His creation.
The vision of theoria physike is essentially sophianic. Man by
theoria is able to unite the hidden wisdom of God in things with
the hidden light of wisdom in himself. The meeting and marriage
of these two brings about a resplendent clarity within man himself,
and this clarity is the presence of Divine Wisdom fully recognized
in the memory” (13, 15) (Romano Guardini, The Conversion of Augustine, trans.
Elinor Briefs [Westminster, MD: Newman Press, 1960]).
and active in him. Thus man becomes a mirror of the divine glory,
and is resplendent with divine truth not only in his mind but in
his life. He is filled with the light of wisdom which shines forth
in him, and thus God is glorified in him. At the same time he ex-
ercises a spiritualizing influence in the world by the work of his
hands which is in accord with the creative wisdom of God in things
and in history. Hence we can see the great importance of a so-
phianic, contemplative orientation of man’s life. No longer are
we reduced to a purely negative attitude toward the world around
us, toward history, toward the judgements of God. The world is
no longer seen as merely material, hence as an obstacle that has
to be grudgingly put up with. It is spiritual through and through.
But grace has to work in and through us to enable us to carry out
this real transformation. Things are not fully spiritual in them-
selves; they have to be spiritualized by our knowledge and love
in our use of them. Hence it is impossible for one who is not puri-
fied to “transfigure” material things; on the contrary, the logoi
will remain hidden and he himself will be captivated by the
sensible attractions of these things.
The “will of God” is no longer a blind force plunging through
our lives like a cosmic steamroller and demanding to be accepted
willy-nilly. On the contrary, we are able to understand the hidden
purposes of the creative wisdom and the divine mercy of God,
and can cooperate with Him as sons with a loving Father. Not only
that, but God Himself hands over to man, when he is thus purified
and enlightened, and united with the divine will, a certain creative
initiative of his own, in political life, in art, in spiritual life, in wor-
ship: man is then endowed with a causality of his own.
The Three Laws: the best approach to the full idea of theoria
physike is the synthesis of the three laws as described by St. Maxi-
mus.349 The object of theoria is for Maximus something more dy-
namic and profound than simply the spiritual sense of Scripture
and the logoi of creatures, with providence etc. (though Maximus
349. See von Balthasar, Liturgie Cosmique, 221-42; ET: 291–314.

is weak on the importance of history in theoria physike350). The

object of theoria is not only nature (phusis) and the Law (nomos)
but the two together, fused on a higher level of unity in Christ
Who is the fulfillment of both nature and the Law. Hence we
have Nature (phusis)—the Greeks—(Elias)—body of wisdom,
{and} Law (nomos)—the Jews—(Moses)—soul of wisdom, {united
in} Christ the true Law. Body and soul are united in the higher
unity of spirit, which is in Christ, the true Law of the cosmos
and its fulfillment, the fullness of wisdom and revelation.351
(Moses and Elias are here brought in in reference to their position
in the Transfiguration on either side of Christ. Theoria is then
contemplation of the splendor of divine wisdom in Christ with
nature [Elias] on one side and law [Moses] on the other, both
looking to Him as to their fulfillment. In the full development of
theoria they both disappear and we see Christ alone.) Von Balthasar
says: “The meaning of each natural thing and the meaning of
every law and commandment is to be an Incarnation of the divine
Word; to realize fully its proper nature or its proper law is to co-
operate fully in the total realization of the Word in the world”
(Liturgie Cosmique, p. 224352). Note that both phusis and nomos,
without Christ, tend unnaturally and against His intention to
separation and not to unity. {With regard to} nature, the true logos
of man demands unity with Christ, in love and in will, and unity
with other men. Egoism, however, {is} dominated by the action
and desire of sense, which separates, produces an unnatural state
of division against {the} natural tendency to unity in love. {With
regard to} Law, justice as such tends to unity, as nature does. But
the letter of the Law creates {a} multiplicity of cases, distinctions,
problems, decisions, and eventual separation between this one
and that one, ending with inequality. Without theoria physike, which
penetrates to the inner logos, and {its} orientation to unity and
simplicity and wholeness, nature and law tend to disintegration,
350. So von Balthasar, Liturgie Cosmique, 127; ET: 179.

351. See Ambigua, PG 91, cols. 1161AD, 1164AD, 1165A.
352. ET: 294.
separation and conflict. With the understanding of the logoi, in

love and in the light given by God, they fulfill their true purpose
and tend to unity, {to} recapitulation in Christ.
Logoi of things: hence we now have one important conclu-
sion. The logos of things and the spirit of Law are those inmost
and essential elements primarily intended by God, placed in
them by God, oriented to unity in love, in Himself.
A. The logos of a man is therefore something hidden in him,
spiritual, simple, profound, unitive, loving, selfless, self-forget-
ting, oriented to love and to unity with God and other men in
Christ. It is not an abstract essence, “rationality plus animality.”
It is however the divine image in him. More deeply it is Christ in
him, either actually or potentially. To love Christ in our brother
we must be able to see Him in our brother, and this demands
really the gift of theoria physike. Christ in us must be liberated, by
purification, so that the “image” in us, clothed anew with light
of the divine likeness, is able connaturally to recognize the same
likeness in another, the same tendency to love, to simplicity, to
unity. Without love this is completely impossible.
B. Creatures: the vision given by theoria physike shows us
that all creatures are good and pure. This is the first thing, the
complement of the active detachment in apatheia. Evagrius de-
clares, following the desert tradition (especially St. Anthony) that
“nothing created by God is evil,”353 and St. Maximus adds, “noth-
ing created is impure.”354 (He comments on the vision of Peter at
Joppa, the creatures let down in the sheet. {The} accommodated
sense {here is that} all created things are seen to be good, made
by God and reflecting His goodness.355) This implies not mere
negative indifference but a positive awareness, by love, of the
value of creatures, divinely given to them, placed in them by the
353. Kephalaia Gnostica, III.59 (Guillaumont, Six Centuries, 123).

354. Questiones ad Thalassium, 27 (PG 90, cols. 357D, 360A), quoted in von
Balthasar, Liturgie Cosmique, 140; ET: 194.
355. See Questiones ad Thalassium, 27 (PG 90, cols. 353B, 356A), quoted in
von Balthasar, Liturgie Cosmique, 234–35; ET: 305.
Creator to reflect Him in them. Once again it becomes clear how

and in what sense theoria is necessary to complete apatheia and
gives it positive meaning. The right use of creatures is essential to
the proper understanding of them. St. Maximus says356 we must
be attuned not only to the logoi of creatures but also to tropoi or
models of action: we get light from the logoi; we get order and
love from the tropoi. They not only move us to praise but they
guide us in action. It is very important to realize that theoria
physike is actually a dynamic unity of contemplation and action,
a loving knowledge that comes along with use and work. Note,
the examples given by Maximus are stereotyped and can be im-
proved upon. They do not give the full depth of his conception.
For instance: the heavens—it is almost a stoic cliché to say that
the tropos of the heavens is their stability and their tranquillity
in order, etc.; other ones {include} the eagle, who looks directly
at the sun; the lion, whose bones, when clashed together, produce
sparks ({an example which} teaches {us} to compare texts in Scrip-
ture). Here we are in the realm of allegory, and very tame allegory,
while in reality the intuitions of theoria physike penetrate far
deeper than this. To return to the main point made above: theoria
physike plus praxis is proper to a man who has attained full ma-
turity and integrity in the spiritual life, the holokleros.357 This, we
repeat, is arrived at through the proper understanding of the
logos of things and the natural appreciation of and practical “imi-
tation” of their tropoi. Hence the completeness conferred by theo-
ria physike is not simply a gnosis superimposed upon the
virtuousness acquired during the practice of virtues in the active
life. It is a twofold, speculative and practical, contemplative gift,
a double illumination in the order of action and of contemplation,
given by God through the gnostic evaluation of things and events,
particularly of Scripture.
356. Questiones ad Thalassium, 51 (PG 90, col. 481B), cited in J. Lemaitre,

“Contemplation: III. Contemplation chez les Grecs et Autres Orientaux Chré-
tiens: II. La Theoria Phusike,” DS 2, col. 1817.
357. “the whole or complete person” (see I Thes. 5:23; James 1:4).
Logos and Mystery: it must be quite clear that the spiritual

sense of Scripture, for instance, is something much more than
mere allegory. As we said above in connection with Gregory of
Nyssa,358 it is a direct contact with the Word hidden in the words
of Scripture. How do the logoi of created things find their expres-
sion in relation to the mystery of our salvation? Certain created
material things enter explicitly into the framework of ritual mys-
teries, the celebration of the mystery of our salvation. In so doing
they “represent” all creatures, for all creatures not only “groan
with us expecting the redemption of the Sons of God”359 but enter
directly or indirectly with us into the great mystery of Christ. To
see the logoi of creatures we are going to have to recognize in
them this “groaning” and this “eschatological expectation” which
depends on us—on our knowledge of them, on our use of them,
with a directly sophianic and soteriological reference. To begin
to realize the logoi of creatures we must then always be conscious
of their mute appeal to us to find and rescue the glory of God that
has been hidden in them and veiled by sin. {There is} a special
problem of modern time, with its technology: technology, with
its impersonal, pragmatic, quantitative exploitation and manipu-
lation of things, is deliberately indifferent to their logoi. Consid-
eration of the symbolic logos of a thing would be an obstacle to
science and technology, so many seem to think. Hence the logos
must be excluded. No interest {is shown} in “what” a thing really
is. {This is} a deliberate conversion to the alogon, the me on.360
Meonic preoccupation {is} a kind of liberation of the me on in order
that there may take place a demonic cult of change, and “ex-
change”—consumption, production, destruction, for their own
sakes. {Note the} centrality of destruction in this process. Technol-
ogy leads to demonic pseudo-contemplation, {a} mystique of
technics and production. The chief effort of Teilhard de Chardin
358. See above, page 74.

359. Romans 8:21-23 (condensed).
360. “the irrational, non-being”: Lemaitre, “Contemplation,” col. 1822,
quoting Eusebius of Caesarea, Preparatio Evangelica, 15.17 (PG 21, col. 1345B).
in our time has been a noble striving to recover a view of the

scientific world, the cosmos of the physicist, the geologist, the
engineer, with interest centered on the logos of creation, and on
value, spirit, an effort to reconvert the scientific view of the cosmos
into a wisdom, without sacrificing anything of scientific objectivity
or technological utility. The logoi and the spirit of Scripture are
not discovered merely by study. They are not communicated by
the doctors. They are the Kiss of the Word Himself, not the Kiss
of His mouth. The Word, {the} Logos, teaches us how the logoi are
oriented to Him, how they are both in Him, and for Him. The
logoi of things are in the Logos: they are created in the Logos. The
logoi of things are then the Logos in things. “In every being there
is a logos sophos kai technicos beyond our vision” (St. Gregory of
Nyssa, In Hexaemeron, PG 44.73A).361 This is the theoteles logos:362
that in the thing which comes from God and goes to God. Theoria
physike then demands that we enter into the movement of all
things from God back to God; and it implies realization of the ob-
stacle in the way of this movement placed in the world by philautia363
and sin, which makes things created by God serve our own im-
mediate interests.
Theoria physike implies a sense of community with things in the
work of salvation. {The} logos of bread and wine {is} not merely to
nourish man physically but to serve the unity of mankind in Christ
sacramentally. Wine is something which points beyond itself to
the “new wine” in the Kingdom. The new wine is not something
that is purely spiritual and therefore “not material wine.” On the
contrary, in the Eucharist, material wine is transformed not only
361. “a wise and skillful ordering principle” (quoted in Lemaitre, “Con-

templation,” cols. 1821–22).
362. “the logos tending toward God” (Questiones ad Thalassium, 32 [PG 90,
col. 372B]), quoted in Lemaitre, “Contemplation,” col. 1819.
363. “self-love”: see von Balthasar, Liturgie Cosmique, 132, 142–43; ET: 184,
195; see also ET: 298; see also Irénée Hausherr, sj, Philautie: De la Tendresse pour
Soi á la Charité selon Saint Maxime le Confesseur (Rome: Pontificale Institutum
Orientalium Studiorum, 1952).
into spiritual wine, but into the “mystical wine” which is the Blood
of Christ. The logos of a table {is} realized in the mystical table
which is the altar around which the brethren gather for the frater-
nal meal at which the Risen Christ will be mystically present and
will break bread. Christ Himself is the table of the altar. Hence, St.
Maximus sums it up: “The whole world is a game of God. As one
amuses children with flowers and bright colored clothes and then
gets them later used to more serious games, literary studies, so
God raises us up first of all by the great game of nature, then by
the Scriptures [with their poetic symbols]. Beyond the symbols of
Scripture is the Word. . . . ”364 The spiritual knowledge of God in
things is given to men in the desert of this world as manna was
given to feed the Hebrews in the desert of Sinai (Quest. 39 ad Tha-
las.).365 Maximus makes clear that the spiritual senses function in
theoria physike as in their proper realm (cf. Gregory of Nyssa366). By
the logoi of things the Divine Creator draws men who are attuned
to logoi, the logical men, logikoi, to communion with the Logos.
When a man has been purified and humbled, when his eye is
single, and he is his own real self, then the logoi of things jump out
at him spontaneously. He is then a logikos.
Art: logos and epiphany: here we can see the importance of
theoria physike for sacred art. The sacred artist of all people should
be a logikos. Hence it is not true that he does not need to be puri-
fied. He must in some sense be one who has attained to the sum-
mit of apatheia—not of course in the conventional way in which
the average pious Catholic might conceive it. He does not neces-
sarily have to be fully respectable in a conventional sense. A kind
of unconventionality may be in him a form of humility and folly
for Christ, and part of his apatheia. We must not forbid the artist
a necessary element of paradox in his life. Conformism will per-
haps blind him and enslave his talent. But he must at all costs
364. Von Balthasar, Liturgie Cosmique, 239, paraphrasing Ambigua (PG 91,
col. 1413CD); ET: 310–11.
365. PG 90, col. 392B.
366. See above, pages 92–96.
have attained to an inner purity and honesty, a sincerity and in-

tegrity of spirit. He must be a holokleros, who understands the
logoi of things and is attuned to their tropoi. He must be in com-
munication with things, in their deepest center, in their most real
value. He must be attuned to their voice. He must sense some-
thing of their “logic,” their vocation. He must also sense in what
way they are being prevented by man, and by society, by misuse,
from attaining to their true spiritual end. The artist at the present
time is bound in one way or other to protest against the systematic
obscuring and desecration of the logoi of things and of their sa-
cred meaning. For that reason an artist who would serve a com-
pletely secular society and put his art at the disposal of
propaganda for materialistic illusions, would be destroying him-
self as an artist, especially if he served up conventional forms of
“beauty.” He would be conniving at the desecration and destruc-
tion of art. In so doing he would be betraying created things, and
betraying his vocation as artist. This by no means condones any
illusion of the artist as a “special kind of man,” but his technical
gifts as maker demand to be sustained by a spiritual gift as “seer.”
Note that once again this does not imply allegory or explicit
symbolism or some special “message,” nor does it imply peculiar
forms of “fine art.” The perception of the logos of a thing by an
artist is manifested by the form which he gives to things. Exam-
ples of work sensitive to logoi {include}:
1) Shaker handicrafts and furniture, {which are} deeply im-
pregnated by the communal mystique of the Shaker community.
The simplicity and austerity demanded by their way of life en-
abled an unconscious spiritual purity to manifest itself in full
clarity. Shaker handicrafts are then a real epiphany of logoi, char-
acterized by spiritual light. See also their buildings, barns espe-
cially—{they have a} highly mystical quality: capaciousness,
dignity, solidity, permanence. {What would be the} logos of a
barn? “But my wheat, gather ye into my barn.”367 Note: it is never
367. Matthew 13:30.

{a} question of a “barn” in the abstract and in no definite place:

the Shaker farm building always fits right into its location, mani-
fests the “logos” of the place where it is built, grasps and expresses
the hidden logos of the valley, or hillside, etc. which forms its site.
{This} logos of the site {is likewise} important in Cistercian mon-
asteries of {the} twelfth century. Note {the} absence of this in certain
religious settings—pseudo-Gothic, which ignores true logoi {and}
substitutes an arbitrary and false logos, in the head. Modern ar-
chitecture with its pretended functionalism also is quite arbitrary
(cf. Mumford on UN buildings368).
2) A primitive painter, Le Douanier Rousseau369—some of
his paintings might be discussed as unconscious theoria physike
on an obscure and not explicitly Christian level—but anyway on
a kind of “spiritual” level. The “spiritual” content of Douanier
Rousseau {is found in his} archetypal symbols. {For example,}
The Sleeping Gypsy {manifests the} logos of passion {as well as}
apatheia. Whether or not Douanier Rousseau ever attained to
“apatheia” (in the strict sense) {is} highly doubtful! ({cf.} his loves
and angers). But The Sleeping Gypsy represents for him the attain-
368. Lewis Mumford wrote a number of quite critical articles on the siting,
planning and building of the United Nations headquarters in New York City,
originally published in The New Yorker between 1947 and 1953 and included
in his collection From the Ground Up: Observations on Contemporary Architecture,
Housing, Highway Building, and Civic Design (New York: Harcourt, Brace &
World, 1956), 20–70.
369. The reference is to Henri Rousseau (1844–1910), known as “Le Doua-
nier” (“the Customs Officer”) from an early job; on September 9, 1958, Merton
writes in his journal of borrowing books on Rousseau from the University of
Kentucky library (Thomas Merton, A Search for Solitude: Pursuing the Monk’s True
Life. Journals, vol. 3: 1952–1960, ed. Lawrence S. Cunningham [San Francisco:
HarperCollins, 1996], 217), evidently in connection with work on his book Art
and Worship, which remains unpublished (see Search for Solitude, 202 [5/9/58],
218 [9/26/58]). The painting of The Sleeping Gypsy (1897), now in The Museum
of Modern Art in New York, depicts a dark figure stretched out on the bare
ground, wearing a multi-colored robe and holding a staff in his right hand, with
a lute and a jug placed next to him, and a lion immediately behind him, with
mountains and a moonlit sky in the background.
ment of balance and a solution of a long inner conflict of which

he was perhaps not even aware. We may see here at least an
analogy of that theoria to which primitives are well disposed.
The Dangers and Limitations of Theoria Physike:
a) Theoria physike is between the human and the divine. It
involves sense and spirit together. It demands man’s activity and
divine grace. It is not yet pure contemplation; it is only the begin-
ning of the contemplative life, the threshold.
b) It involves alternations, and the possibility of delusion. A
light that is truly spiritual may be seized upon by the senses and
diverted to less pure ends. One may mistake sensible indulgence
for spiritual inspiration. When the senses are refined and spiri-
tualized, and yet not completely purified, there remains a danger
that a more exquisite form of sense pleasure on a higher and more
refined level may be accepted completely as spiritual and
mystical.
c) This problem is explicitly treated by St. Maximus in Quest.
58 to Thalassios.370 When sense still predominates, natural con-
templation is falsified, because it seems natural to us to cling to
the beauty of things with sense and spirit at the same time, and
consequently sense is not subordinated to spirit. The subordina-
tion of sense to spirit seems to us unnatural. Hence the complaints
and protests of those who, in demanding that nature be respected,
are really asserting illusory “rights” for what is not a natural state,
that is a state in which sense predominates over spirit.
d) The right order {is this}: when sense attains to the material
object, the spirit attains to the spiritual logos of that object and the
sense pleasure is forgotten. There may indeed be a coincidence
of contemplation in the spirit and suffering in sense.371 Let us be careful
not to be misled by legitimate protests against “dolorism” into
370. PG 90, cols. 596D–597B; see von Balthasar, Liturgie Cosmique, 146; ET:
201.
371. See Questiones ad Thalassium, 58 (PG 90, cols. 597D, 600A), quoted in
von Balthasar, Liturgie Cosmique, 212; ET: 280.
asserting that the senses have {a} right to more than is naturally
due to them—that is to say, to emphasize sense satisfaction as a
natural flowering of the spirit, when such satisfaction has to be
disciplined and brought into subordination by suffering and sac-
rifice. Hence St. Maximus says372 that just as Ezechias blocked up
the wells around Jerusalem in time of danger, so we should aban-
don theoria physike in time of temptation and return to compunc-
tion and simple prayer.
VII. The Dionysian Tradition

We now come to the very important mystical tradition of
Pseudo-Denys the Areopagite who, by virtue of his tremendous
authority as the supposed Bishop of Athens converted by Paul,
was the real propagator of Christian mystical theology. He is the
one who begins to use the term Theologia Mystica. He is the first
to write a separate, distinct treatise on this subject. His wide-
spread influence in the West, which grew and grew in the late
Middle Ages (n.b. he was thought also to have been Bishop of
Paris) had profound effects: it led to the definitive break between
mysticism and scholastic theology, among some of his medieval
followers. In any case, it is Denys who seems more than any other
theologian to represent the birth of mystical theology in its own
right. At least later generations ascribed this to him, always be-
lieving that he went back to apostolic times. {There is a} curious
contrast between the history of Denys and that of Evagrius.
Evagrius (actually one of the masters of Denys) was rejected as
an Origenist heretic. Denys was accepted as a bishop and martyr
of apostolic times, a convert of St. Paul. Through Denys some of
the most purely neo-Platonist elements enter into Christianity,
and they are accepted without question, to become part of our
tradition. It is possible that the writer of the Dionysian texts was
a heretic (Monophysite).
372. Questiones ad Thalassium, 49 (PG 90, col. 452AB), commenting on 2

Chron. 32:2-3, quoted in Lemaitre, “Contemplation,” col. 1809.
Note however two important qualifications:

a) In spite of the fact of his false identity, the theology of
Pseudo-Denys is highly original and very important. In no case
must he be dismissed or minimized as a kind of literary forger.
The invention of identities was not unusual in those times.
b) The originality of his theology is also contingent upon its
unity. The Mystical Theology must not be separated from all the
rest of his works. It is quite likely that the writers of the late
Middle Ages who, following Denys, broke away from scholastic
theology to become professional “mystical theologians” made
this mistake to a great extent.
The Mystical Theology of Denys is a very short treatise of only
five columns in Migne.373 It is beyond all his other theology. It pre-
supposes all the other Dionysian writings. It presupposes the the-
ology of light and darkness in the Hierarchies and the Divine Names.
It presupposes a strong emphasis on symbolic and sacramental the-
ology, which corresponds to theoria physike in him. Note that both
in the West and in the East there developed a tendency to go dir
ectly from the ascetic life to contemplation without forms, without
passing through theoria physike, in the Middle Ages. This is cer-
tainly as meaningful a fact as the separation between spirituality
and scientific theology, probably much more meaningful. It is here
really that the separation has its most disastrous effect.
We shall study, quite briefly: (1) the Dionysian writings; (2)
the Dionysian tradition in the West. Brevity is necessary and very
desirable at this point. Our time is running out, and the theme
of contemplation in darkness, without forms, is already quite
familiar. It is important to advance and to consider the question
of “Western mysticism,” and the crucial development of mysti-
cism in the late Middle Ages and Renaissance. In this develop-
ment we will find the key to many modern problems.
373. In the Latin translation of John Scotus Erigena: PL 122, cols. 1171B–
1176C; the Greek, with a Latin translation and extensive commentary, is found
in PG 3, cols. 997–1064.
1. The Dionysian Writings: Who was their author? Three

real (?) persons are confused in the legendary figure of Dionysius:
(a) the convert made by Paul (Acts {17:34}); (b) a bishop of Athens
in the second century; (c) {the} apostle of Paris, bishop and mar-
tyr. This legend was widely disseminated in the West by the
Passio Sanctissimi Dionysii of Hilduin, the Abbot of St. Denis.374
This is a fabulous piece of writing with all kinds of inventions or
at least tall tales. Its purpose was more or less directly to enhance
the prestige of the great abbey of St. Denis. {It} was universally
accepted until the Renaissance. L. Valla, followed by Erasmus,
first questioned it.375
Present state of the discussion: nobody knows who the author
may have been. {There are} innumerable hypotheses. At present
the following are accepted as certain,376 following the work of
Koch377 and Stiglmayr:378
a) the author was a fifth-century churchman at least (later
than Evagrius);
b) he depends on Proclus, a late neo-Platonist;
c) he is evidently familiar with the theology of the Council
of Chalcedon.
374. PL 106, cols. 23–50.

375. René Roques, “Denys l’Aréopagite (Le Pseudo-),” DS 3, col. 250.
377. Hugo Koch, “Proklus als Quelle des Pseudo-Dionysius Areopagita in
der Lehre vom Bösen,” Philologus, 54 (1895), 438-54; Pseudo-Dionysius Areopagita
in seinen Beziehungen zum Neuplatonismus und Mysterienwesen: Eine Litterarhisto-
rische Untersuchung, Forschungen zur Christlichen Litteratur- und Dogmengeschich-
te, 1 (fasc. 2-3) (Mainz: F. Kircheim, 1900).
378. J. Stiglmayr, “Der Neuplatoniker Proclus als Vorlage des Sogen Di-
onysius Areopagita in der Lehre vom Uebel,” Historisches Jahrbuch, 16 (1895),
253–73, 721–48; “Das Aufkommen der Pseudo-Dionysischen Schriften und ihr
Eindringen in die Christliche Literature bis zum Laterankonzil 649,” IV Jares
bericht des Öffentlichen Privatgymnasiums an der Stella Matutina zu Feldkirch (Feld-
kirch, 1895), 3–96; Dionysius the Areopagite, Ausgewählte Schriften, ed. J. Stigl-
mayr (Kempten und Muenchen: J. Kösel, 1911).
He is most probably a Syrian of the fifth century, with monophy-

site tendencies. {He} is in any case strongly influenced by
neo-Platonism.
The Writings: the following are the main texts that have
survived:
The Divine Names: {this work is} concerned with our knowl-
edge of the divine attributes. Cataphatic and apophatic theology
{is} explained. God {is seen} as the highest good, {Who} can be
known beyond theology in a passive and ecstatic union of love in
which one “undergoes the divine action,” pati divina.379 This
phrase became consecrated by traditional use. From then on,
mysticism {is} recognized as passive and loving knowledge of
God in divine union. A key text {reads}: “The great Paul, pos-
sessed by divine love, and seized by its ecstatic power, pronounced
those words: I live now not I, etc. . . . For he who is truly seized
by love and made by love to go out of himself does not live by
his own life but by the well-beloved life of the One he loves”
(Div. Nom. IV.13).380 However, the cosmos as seen by Dionysius
is not simply a fallen world in which individuals are called out
by love to salvation and ecstasy. The whole cosmos, or at least
the world of intelligences, is called to one vast ecstasy. God goes
out of Himself ecstatically in creation, and His creatures in turn
go out of themselves to return to Him and to bring others back
to Him. Hence it is a vision of a whole universe of loving intelli-
gences, none of which is concerned with itself, all of which draw
one another to the One. “Ecstatic love forbids each one to belong
to himself.”381
The Hierarchies: the ecstasy of God reaches down through
ordered hierarchies of angels and sacred ministers to attain to
those orders that are farthest from Him. Those orders of angels
379. Divine Names, 2.9 (PG 3, col. 674).

380. PG 3, col. 712A, quoted by René Roques, “Contemplation: III. Con-
templation chez les Grecs et Autres Orientaux Chrétiens: E. Contemplation,
Extase et Tenèbre chez le Pseudo-Denys,” DS 3, col. 1901.
381. Divine Names, 4.13 (PG 3, col. 712A).
only are in direct contact with Him which form the highest triad:
cherubim, seraphim, thrones. The highest in the ecclesiastical
hierarchy (bishops) are in contact with the lowest of the angels.
Celestial Hierarchy: this is the least Christian and the most
neo-Platonic of Denys’ conceptions. The nine choirs of angels
were, however, adopted without question by theology, especially
by the “Angelic” Doctor382 and the whole medieval tradition (see
Dante383). But it does not go back to the Bible—rather, to Pro-
clus.384 See also Jewish mysticism: this is an important element
that has been neglected in the treatment of Denys.385
The Ecclesiastical Hierarchy: {there are} two triads: I. The ini-
tiators: bishops, priests, other ministers (down to porter); II. The
initiated: monks, the people of God, the ones being purified (cat-
echumens, possessed, penitents). The ecclesiastical hierarchy is
in an intermediate state between the celestial hierarchy and the
hierarchy of the Old Law. Hence it deals at the same time with
the contemplation of intelligibles and with the contemplation of
the oikonomia through symbols and sacraments. However this latter
contemplation (theoria physike) still has something of the Old Law
and is therefore imperfect and provisional only. It must pass
away. The bishops perfect all the other orders directly or indi-
rectly: they ordain priests and consecrate monks; priests illumi-
382. See Summa Theologiae, 1a 1ae, q. 108 (Gilby, vol. 14, 120/121-156/157),
cited by Joseph Turbessi, “Denys L’Aréopagite: V. Influence du Pseudo-Denys
en Occident: A. Au 13e Siècle,” DS 3, col. 355.
383. In the Paradiso, the first nine heavens (from the Heaven of the Moon
through the Primum Mobile) are aligned with the nine choirs of angels (from
the angels through the seraphim); the tenth heaven, the Empyrean, is beyond
the angelic orders.
384. See René Roques, “Denys L’Aréopagite: II. Doctrine du Pseudo-De-
nys,” DS 3, col. 270: “The temptation was great, then, to distribute the various
angelic groups according to a triadic scheme, and to model their functions on
those of the intelligible essences of Iamblichus and of Proclus. Denys has not
resisted this temptation.”
385. See now Naomi Janowitz, “Theories of Divine Names in Origen and
Pseudo-Dionysius,” History of Religions, 30.4 (May 1991), 359–72.
nate the people of God; other ministers purify penitents and

catechumens. Hence we see the relation of the various orders as
fellows:
(Angels)
Bishops
(perfect and perfecting)
Priests Ministers Monks

(illuminate) (purify) (perfect but not
perfecting)
People of God catechumens, penitents
In the book on The Church Hierarchy he also treats of the sacra-

ments as follows: baptism; sacrament of union (Eucharist); the
holy oils; priestly consecration; monastic consecration; funeral
rites. {It is} interesting that he regards monastic profession as a
sacrament. Note what he says of monks: they are the “perfect”
but have no mission to perfect others. They are “pure”; they are
“one” and “alone”; they are the true philosophers.386 (What is said
in The Church Hierarchy needs to be completed by the lost book
on Symbolic Theology, often alluded to in his other works.)
The cosmos of Denys is then a vast ecstatic communion of
intelligences striving to respond to the call of divine Love sum-
moning them to unity in Christ, each according to his rank and
degree of purity. In this cosmos, the love of God flows out in a
thearchy, a divinely ruled order in which the love of the creature,
produced in it by God, leads the creature back to Him. The love
of God as agape awakens eros in the creature.387 Eros is divine agape
responding to itself in {the} creature. The love of superiors for
inferiors in the hierarchy resembles the divine agape and serves
as {an} instrument of the thearchy. The return of created beings
to God by love is not an absorption, a plunging into God and
386. See Roques, “Denys,” col. 271.

387. See Histoire de Spiritualité, vol. 1, 482-83; ET: 404.
disappearing, but a flowering, a perfection, a divinization. Created

beings reach their full perfection in their return to God. The gen-
erosity of creatures toward one another helps them all to return
ecstatically to the One.
Symbolism and Mysticism: the merciful love of God, the thear-
chy, has placed symbols at the disposal of men and angels, to help
bring about the return of all to God. Angels teach men by means
of symbols; {they} do not need symbols themselves. Symbols are
appropriate to men as creatures of body and spirit. However
there is always a certain risk due to the material element in sym-
bols. To avoid attachment to the sensible element (which would
lead to idolatry and illusion) we must be purified by asceticism.
{This is the} same thing we saw above: theoria physike demands
purification from passionate thoughts. The real function of sym-
bolic contemplation is to discover the “deiform” content of the
symbol. Sacramental symbolism {is} not {a} mere matter of rites
or allegorical explanation of ceremonies. Direct contact with the
divine life {is} conferred by the sacraments. This demands two
things: a spiritual initiation {and} being in one’s right place in
the “hierarchy.” (To attempt by one’s own power to accede to a
higher level, without the help of the higher ones, is to exclude
oneself from the hierarchy.) Beyond symbols: we rise beyond
symbols by the apophatic negation of the material elements, but
the trans-symbolic contemplation in darkness is not negative; it
is positive, transcendent.
Mystical Theology is not just {the} via negationis, apophatic
theology, dialectical. It is beyond both forms of discursive theol-
ogy, cataphatic and apophatic.388 It is the fulfillment of both
and their justification for existing. It is a transcendent and
experienced theology beyond symbols and discourse. It is not
relative (apophatic theology is in relation to the cataphatic which
it completes and corrects). Mystical theology stands in relation
to no other theology. {It} is a pure immaterial vision beyond intel-

ligence, beyond reflection and self-correction. It is beyond the

division of intelligence and will: hence it is not to be called pri-
marily a matter of intelligence or primarily a matter of love: the
followers of Dionysius in the West emphasize it as an act of will
and thus tend to diminish it. {It is} passive, beyond activity, {at}
the summit of the spirit, invaded and possessed by ecstatic love
directly given by God, a pure grace, pure love, {which} contacts
God in ecstasy. Ecstasy {is} a complete break with sense, with in-
telligence and with the self. Here Dionysius goes beyond Greg-
ory and Evagrius: {it is} outside the intelligence, the will, all
created beings and the self. This is the important contribution of
Dionysius—the full meaning of ecstasy, not just a going out from
all things other than the self, but out of the self also.
Outline of De Mystica Theologia: {it is} addressed to one “Timo-
thy,” {and} begins with a prayer to the Trinitas supersubstantialis
et superdea.389 Timothy in the prologue is urged to rise above all
operations of sense and intellect, beyond all beings and non-be-
ings, and enter into the darkness like Moses. Dionysius refers to
his other works (Divine Names; Symbolic Theology; Hierarchies):
descending from God to creatures he has expanded and explained;
ascending from creatures to God he will return rather to silence.
Hence the Mystical Theology which is supposed to crown his other
theological writings, is very brief and concise. (Note: it must al-
ways be seen in the context of his other work.) God is not sensible
but the cause of sensible things. He is not intelligible but the
cause of intelligible things. In ascending beyond sensibles and
intelligibles to Him we give Him the greatest praise.
Points to emphasize:
a) {It is} not {focused on} darkness as opposed to light,
but {on} a point beyond darkness and light in which both are
389. “Trinity beyond all substance and all divinity”; Merton is using the
Latin translation of John Sarrazin: see Dionysiaca: Recueil Donnant l’Ensemble des
Traductions Latines des Ouvrages Attribués au Denys de l’Aréopage, ed. P. Cheval-
lier, 2 vols. (Paris: Desclée de Brouwer, 1937, 1950), 565.
transcendently pure: superignota et supersplendentia390 {. . .} secun-

dum supersplendentem occulte docti silentii caliginem.391
b) {It entails} ecstasy even from the self: Excessu tui ipsius
. . . munde . . . ad {. . .} divinarum tenebrarum radium cuncta
auferens et a cunctis absolutus sursum ageris . . .392
c) {It} is a true transcendent knowledge: {cf.} Moses in the
darkness: eo quod nihil cognoscit super mentem cognoscens.393
d) This seems like pure folly to the non-mystic: et nunc et
caliginem quae est supra mentem introeuntes, non sermonum brevita-
tem sed irrationabilitatem perfectam et imprudentiam inveniemus.394
These are the classical phrases which were to be echoed every-
where in the West in the late Middle Ages.
2. The Dionysian Tradition in the West: (Note: do not
confuse the term Dionysian, referring to Pseudo-Dionysius, with
Nietzsche’s word,395 which refers to Dionysus [Bacchus].) What
is said now must be remembered when we come to discuss the
problem of Western mysticism. One of the chief points on which
390. “beyond all unknowing and beyond all illumination”: Mystica Theo-
logia, 1.1, which reads “. . . superignotum et supersplendentem . . . ” in Sarrazin
(Dionysiaca, 565).
391. “according to the dazzling darkness of the secretly instructed silence”:
Mystica Theologia, 1.1 (Dionysiaca, 565).
392. “leaving behind all things and having been released from all things
by completely transcending yourself, you will be brought on high to a ray of
divine darkness [beyond all being]”: Mystica Theologia, 1.2, which reads “ . . . ad
supersubstantialem divinarum . . . ” in Sarrazin (Dionysiaca, 568–69).
393. “for he knows nothing, having knowledge beyond the intellect”:
Mystica Theologia, 1.6 (Dionysiaca, 578).
394. “And now, entering the darkness which is above the mind, we will
find not briefness of speech but complete mindlessness and thoughtlessness”:
Mystica Theologia, 3.2, which reads “. . . super mentem . . . ” in Sarrazin (Diony-
siaca, 589–90).
395. In The Birth of Tragedy, his first book (1872), Nietzsche contrasted the
orderly, rational Apollonian and the irrational, ecstatic Dionysian dimensions
of classical Greek drama, and of the springs of human creativity generally: see
Friedrich Nietzsche, The Birth of Tragedy and The Genealogy of Morals, trans. Fran-
cis Golffing (Garden City, NY: Doubleday Anchor, 1956), 1–146.
the thesis of Dom Butler rests is that “genuine” Western mysti-

cism is “pre-Dionysian” and untainted by the influence of Dio-
nysius.396 This is an oversimplification. We are going now to treat
of Western medieval writers who appeal to Denys as to the su-
preme authority in mysticism. These are Butler’s “Dionysians,”
presumably. Yet though they do this they remain primarily Au-
gustinians for the most part, with rare exceptions, like the author
of The Cloud of Unknowing. Perhaps the Rhenish mystics, whom
we treat separately, are some of them (Eckhart) more Dionysian
than Augustinian.
a) In 649 A.D. St. Maximus was in Rome, visiting the papal
palace, and saw in the library of Gregory the Great a copy of
Pseudo-Dionysius.397 But St. Gregory is one of the “purely Western
mystics” according to Butler.
b) {Note} the translation of Denys by Hilduin, abbot of St.
Denys (832).398 It is a very poor work. Scotus Erigena did a better
one a few years later in the same century. In the ninth century
translations of Denys are being made in France. Denys becomes
known but is not yet widely read or above all understood. One of
the first uses of Denys in the West by a mystic was that of Adam
the (English) Carthusian in his De Quadripartito Exercitio Cellae.399
John of Salisbury encouraged a new translation of Denys by J.
Sarrazin.400
c) {In the} twelfth century, the Victorines, canons of the School
of St. Victor {in} Paris, {were} friends of Bernard, theologians and
mystics—they popularize Denys. The School of St. Victor was

397. See Philippe Chevallier, “Pseudo-Denys: V. Influence du Pseudo-Denys
en Occident: A. Du 6e au 12e Siècle: 1. Origine de l’Influence Dionysienne,” DS
3, cols. 318–19.
398. Chevallier, “Pseudo-Denys,” col. 319.
399. The Four-Part Exercise of the Cell (PL 153, cols. 787-884; see Eric
Colledge, ed., The Medieval Mystics of England [New York: Charles Scribner’s
Sons, 1961], 45–47).
400. See Colledge, Medieval Mystics, 48.
founded by William of Champeaux in 1108. William retired to

{the} hermitage of St. Victor after his quarrel with Abelard. Dis-
ciples gathered round him. The school represented a spiritual
reaction against the twelfth-century logicians. Hugh of St. Victor
and the Victorines emphasized: the Bible and the Fathers; the
sacraments; the Christian mysteries; contemplation as the cul-
mination and fulfillment of philosophy and theology; interest in
psychology and analysis of experience, especially of love; mania
for systematic divisions, characteristic of the time; degrees of love
and contemplation. De Contemplatione et eius Speciebus:401 love {is}
more important than knowledge {and} goes further. {The} summit
of contemplation {involves} silence of the mouth, spirit and rea-
son, quiescence of {the} soul, memory and will, {and} bridal union
with the Word. (Read {the} quote from De Arca Noe in Late Medieval
Mysticism, p. 92.402) Hugh of St. Victor improved the translation
401. On Contemplation and its Different Kinds: this is a treatise attributed to

Hugh of St. Victor that may have been put together by his students from class
notes; see Bernard McGinn, The Growth of Mysticism: Gregory the Great through
the Twelfth Century. The Presence of God: A History of Western Christian Mysticism,
vol. 2 (New York: Crossroad, 1994), 384 and 586, n. 106. It has been edited by
Roger Baron as Hugues de Saint-Victor: La Contemplation et ses Espèces (Paris: Des-
clée, 1958).
402. “The first man was so created that if he had not sinned he would
always have beheld in present contemplation his Creator’s face, and by always
seeing him would have loved him always, and by loving would always have
clung close to him, and by clinging to him who was eternal would have pos-
sessed life without end. Evidently the one true good of man was perfect knowl-
edge of his Creator. But he was driven from the face of the Lord, since for his sin
he was struck with the blindness of ignorance, and passed from that intimate
light of contemplation; and he inclined his mind to earthly desires, as he began
to forget the sweetness of the divine. Thus he was made a wanderer and fugitive
over the earth. A wanderer indeed, because of disordered concupiscence; and
a fugitive, through guilty conscience, which feels every man’s hand against it.
For every temptation will overcome the man who has lost God’s aid. So man’s
heart which had been kept secure by divine love, and one by loving One, after-
ward began to flow here and there through earthly desires. For the mind which
knows not to love its true good is never stable and never rests. Hence restless-
ness, and ceaseless labor, and disquiet, until the man turns and adheres to Him.
of Erigena and wrote a commentary on the Celestial Hierarchy.

{He} removes pantheist elements injected into Denys by Erigena,
{and} makes accessible the real meaning of Denys. The Victorines,
who were above all Augustinians (very definitely), begin to popu-
larize Denys. It can be said however that the Victorines as a whole
belong to the tradition of speculation and devotion which can be
considered the main line from Augustine to the Franciscans. They
are therefore real Augustinians first of all, and Dionysians sec-
ondarily. {Also important is} Richard of St. Victor—his De Trini-
tate403 is fundamental. This marks him as a disciple of Augustine.
Benjamin Major404 {and} Benjamin Minor405 {are his} two tracts on
contemplation. {Their} emphasis {is} on the love that wounds, on
the languor amoris406 (cf. St. Bernard and courtly love407), {on} thirst
for God {and} the “mystical death” of love in ecstasy. (Read Ben-
jamin Minor, ch. 73, 82.408) Note these concepts are inseparable
The sick heart wavers and quivers; the cause of its disease is love of the world;
the remedy, the love of God. . . . In two ways God dwells in the human heart,
to wit, through knowledge and through love; yet the dwelling is one, since every
one who knows him loves, and no one can love without knowing. Knowledge
through cognition of the faith erects the structure; love through virtue paints the
edifice with color” (Prologue, Bk. 1, c. 2 [PL 176, cols. 619–21D], in Ray C. Petry,
ed., Late Medieval Mysticism, Library of Christian Classics [LCC] [Philadelphia:
Westminster Press, 1957], 92–93).
403. PL 196, cols. 887–992.
404. PL 196, cols. 63–202.
405. PL 196, cols. 1–64.
406. “the languor of love” (Richard of St. Victor, De Gradibus Charitatis, 2;
PL 196, cols. 1198D–1199A).
407. See Gilson, Appendix IV: “St. Bernard and Courtly Love” (170–97).
408. Chapter 73 (PL 196, col. 52BD), entitled “Quam sit arduum, vel difficile
gratiam contemplationis obtinere” (“How arduous and difficult it is to acquire the
grace of contemplation”), speaks of the impatient longing experienced by Ra-
chel (symbol of reason) as she awaits the birth of Benjamin (contemplation),
which she is powerless to bring about by her own efforts because contemplation
is a divine gift; Rachel dies when Benjamin is born because reason is transcend-
ed by contemplative awareness. Chapter 82 (cols. 58A-59B), entitled “Quam sint
incomprehensibilia, quae mens per excessum videt ex revelatione divina” (“How there
are incomprehensible things that the mind sees through ecstasy from a divine
from secular trends idealizing erotic love in poetry and literature.

This influence is very important in {the} development of medieval
and modern spirituality. Of Richard of St. Victor, St. Bonaventure
said: Anselmus sequitur Augustinum . . . in ratiocinatione; Bernar-
dus sequitur Gregorium . . . in predicatione; Richardus sequitur Dio-
nysium . . . in contemplatione.409 This is interesting as the view of
a mystical doctor concerning the mysticism of the West in the
Middle Ages. Even Bonaventure associates the idea of contem-
plation with Dionysius rather than Augustine or Bernard, and
contemplation means mysticism. Note however that when Dante
seeks a guide to the highest parts of Paradise he goes to Ber-
nard.410 Nevertheless Bernard is regarded as a preacher rather
than as a contemplative. All three could be regarded as mystics
and indeed were. Though Bonaventure places Dionysius above
Augustine he is really more an Augustinian than a Dionysian.
d) The Cistercians: Dom André Fracheboud, ocso, has proved
in DS (article on influence of Denys—vol. III411) that statements
of Gilson412 and Butler413 that Bernard and {the} Cistercians were
not affected by Dionysius are not quite correct. Though it is true
that Bernard is hardly a Dionysian, the effect of Dionysius’ style
is seen in Bernard and the via eminentiae is there. André Frache-
boud disagrees completely that Bernard can be classed as a
“Western mystic” unaffected by the negativity of Denys. Read:
revelation”), relates the experience of the disciples on the mount of transfigu-

ration to the death of Rachel and the birth of contemplation: the disciples’ fall
to the ground at the voice of the Father represents the powerlessness of sense,
memory and reason to comprehend the divine presence, experienced in both
unity of essence and distinction of persons.
409. “Anselm follows Augustine in reasoning, Bernard follows Gregory in
preaching, Richard follows Dionysius in contemplation” (De Reductione Artium
ad Theologiam, c. 6; Opera Omnia, 5:321).
410. Dante, Paradiso, cantos 31–33 (Singleton, Paradiso, 346–81).
411. André Fracheboud, ocso, “Pseudo-Denys: V. Influence du Pseudo-De-
nys en Occident: A. Du 6e au 12e Siècle: 3. Les Cisterciens,” DS 3, cols. 329–40.
412. See Gilson, 25.
413. See Butler, Western Mysticism, 124.
In Cantica.414 {As for} William of St. Thierry, the direct influence of

Denys is clear in the Speculum Fidei et Aenigma Fidei.415 Traces of
Denys {are} also clear in Isaac of Stella and Gilbert of Hoyland.416
Even Gertrude the Great was spoken to by Christ, in vision, in the
language of Pseudo-Denys!!417
e) The Thirteenth Century: Denys influenced the Franciscan
tradition through Grosseteste (through whom he reached Thomas
Gallus—see below). St. Albert the Great based his mystical theology
on Denys. Without knowing Greek he commented on the Hierar-
chies. Note: there is no separation between theology and mysticism
in Albert, any more than in Bonaventure. But like the authors of
the great Summae, including St. Thomas, Albert finds it necessary
to state that although in contemplation the spirit patiendo divina
discit,418 yet study is no obstacle to this but rather disposes for it.
In other words there is already a consciousness of the possible
division between them. What produced this consciousness? Un-
doubtedly the way was paved for it by the struggles of St. Bernard
414. The reference is to In Cantica 4:4 (PL 183, col. 798AC, quoted in Frache-
boud, “Pseudo-Denys,” col. 330, who traces the idea of God as the esse omnium
to Celestial Hierarchy, 4.1): “Omnia omnibus est qui omnia administrat, nec quidquam
est omnium proprie. . . . esse omnium est, sine quo omnia nihil. . . . Sane esse
omnium dixerim Deum, non quia illa sunt quod est ille; sed quia ex ipso, et per ipsum,
et in ipso sunt omnia. Esse est ergo omnium quae facta sunt . . . animantibus autem
quod et vivunt; porro ratione utentibus lux, recte vero utentibus virtus, vincentibus
gloria” (“He who controls everything is all to all things, but He is not in Himself
what those things are at all. . . . He is the being of all things, without whom all
things would be nothing. . . . Of course, I would say that God is the being of all
things not because they are what He is, but because all things exist from Him
and through Him and in Him. Therefore He is the being of all things that have
been made, and to all living creatures He is the source of their life; to all crea-
tures with the use of reason He is light; to all creatures using reason properly He
is virtue; to those who are victorious He is glory”).
415. See Fracheboud, “Pseudo-Denys,” col. 335.
416. See Fracheboud, “Pseudo-Denys,” cols. 336–38.
417. See Fracheboud’s note to Turbessi, col. 357.
418. “learns divine realities through being acted upon” (Summa Theologiae,
Prologue, cited in Turbessi, col. 348 [which reads “patiendo divina didicit”]).
with the pre-scholastics like Abelard in the twelfth century. The

place of William of St. Thierry’s tracts on faith, against Abelard’s
treatment of faith, may be important here. St. Thomas Aquinas
learned of Denys from Albert the Great, his master; {he} com-
mented on the Divine Names (1260-1261). {He} builds his whole
Summa on the idea of the exitus and reditus of Dionysius419—things
going forth from God and returning to Him. {He is} especially
indebted to Denys for his angelology420 but does not follow Denys
in mystical theology. In the question on raptus421 he holds possible
an intuitive vision of God even in this life.
St. Bonaventure, a purely “Western mystic,” the pure type of
the Western mystic (see below), nevertheless appeals to Diony-
sius as “higher” than Augustine. Yet he is a pure Augustinian for
all that. At the end of the De Triplici Via he says there are two
ways of contemplation: (a) per positionem—the way of Augustine;
(b) per ablationem—the way of Dionysius.422 The latter is the via
eminentiae.423 Note how the angelic hierarchies are fitted into the
complex system of “degrees” in the De Triplici Via.424
Thomas Gallus (d. 1246): Gallus, a Victorine, is important as one
of the first to consciously and explicitly use Denys against scholastic
theology. Here he simply follows the Victorine tradition. In con-
scious reaction against Aristotle and the scholastica levitas,425 Gallus
stresses the via negativa and the suspension of all intellectual activity
in favor of an ascent by love to God in darkness. Note that this is
419. M.-D. Chenu, Introduction à l’Étude de Saint Thomas d’Aquin (Montreal:

Institut des Études Médiévale, 1950), 261, cited in Turbessi, col. 354.
420. Turbessi, col. 354.
421. 2a 2ae, q. 180, cited in Turbessi, col. 355.
422. “by attributing . . . by removing”: De Triplici Via, III.7.11 (Opera Om-
nia, 8.16), quoted in Paul Philippe, “Contemplation VI: Contemplation au XIIIe
Siècle,” DS 3, col. 1980.
423. De Triplici Via, III.7.13 (Opera Omnia, 8.17), which actually calls the
second way “eminentior” (“higher”) rather than the more technical term via emi-
nentiae, associated with Pseudo-Dionysius.
424. De Triplici Via, III.7.14 (Opera Omnia, 8.18).
425. “scholarly frivolousness”.
not exactly the Dionysian ascent at all. It is a view which results

from a separation of the Mystica Theologia from Denys’ other works.
{The} true teaching of Denys {incorporates both} (a) {the} intellectual
way: two complementary theological approaches, {the} cataphatic,
{the} way of light, {and the} apophatic, {the} way of darkness; (b)
{the} mystical way: passive, ecstatic, above and beyond the two
above ways of intellect; {it} completes and fulfills them.
{According to the} interpretation by the Dionysians of the
Middle Ages:
a) {the} intellectual way is to be regarded as secondary;
b) the way of ascent to God is by love in darkness.
Thus we arrive at an opposition between love and knowledge. This
is an oversimplification of the classical (including {the} Augustin-
ian) division between wisdom and science. Here read St. Bonaven-
ture, Itinerarium Mentis in Deum (VII.6):
But if you wish to know how such things come about, con-
sult grace, not doctrine; desire, not understanding; prayer-
ful groaning, not studious reading; the Spouse, not the
teacher; God, not man; darkness, not clarity. Consult, not
light, but the fire that completely inflames the mind and
carries it over to God in transports of fervor and blazes of
love. This fire is God, and His furnace is in Jerusalem. Christ
starts the flame with the fiery heat of His intense suffering,
which that man alone truly embraces who can say: “My
soul rather chooseth hanging; and my bones death.” Whoever
loves this death may see God, for this is beyond doubt
true: “No man sees God and still lives.” Let us die, then, and
pass over into the darkness; let us silence every care, every
craving, every dream; with Christ crucified, let us pass out
of this world to the Father. Thus, having seen the Father, we
may say with Philip: “It is enough for us” . . . (trans. by José
de Vinck in The Works of Bonaventure, Mystical Opuscula).426
426. The Works of Bonaventure, trans. José de Vinck, 5 vols. (Paterson, NJ:
St. Anthony Guild Press, 1960–1970), vol. 1: Mystical Opuscula, 58 (which reads,
“No man sees Me . . . ”).
Here love and prayer are contrasted with study, which is incapable
of bringing us to union. Note however that St. Bonaventure cer-
tainly stresses the unity of the intellectual and spiritual lives as
much as anyone ever did. However his followers extracted this kind
of statement from the context and developed the idea indepen-
dently in opposition to speculative theology. This trend was stimu-
lated by the fact that scholastic theology was becoming more and
more a speculative science and less and less a wisdom, even though
the great theologians kept stressing the sapiential aspect of it.
Followers of Gallus {include} Hugh of Balma, a Carthusian (thir-
teenth century), {who} writes a Mystica Theologia which had great
influence, as it was for a long time attributed to St. Bonaventure.427
{It} emphasizes the contrast between mystical wisdom, a gift of
God, and human science, the fruit of study and (scholastic) reason-
ing. {He} deplores the fact that theologians are seeking the latter
more than the former. It is true that with the great love for scho-
lastic thought there was developed a kind of contempt for patristic
and strictly religious wisdom, and for contemplation as such.
Balma is a good mystical theologian. He sees that amor mysticus
is not simply opposed to understanding, but above the usual
levels of both love and understanding. He respects the transcen-
dent quality of the mystical knowledge of God. Amor mysticus
leads to union sine omni investigatione vel meditatione praevia.428 This
does not mean that meditation and study are useless, but that
they do not of themselves directly bring about union, only dispose
for it. However, it would be easy to infer from this that they are
of no use and should be deliberately suppressed. He uses the
classical Dionysian terminology, “ray of darkness,”429 etc. Both
Balma and Gallus situate union in the apex affectus,430 or apex spiri-
427. See Philippe, cols. 1976–77.

428. “Mystical love . . . without any previous investigation or medita-
tion” (quoted in Philippe, col. 1977).
429. Philippe, col. 1977.
430. Thomas Gallus, Extractio in Divinis Nominibus, c. 7, cited in Philippe,
col. 1975.
tus431 (like St. Bonaventure432). This will become the scintilla (vün-
kelin) of Eckhart and the Rhenish mystics.
The Dionysian tradition continues strongly through the four-
teenth century. We will treat of the great fourteenth-century mys-
tics elsewhere. Suffice it to say that the Rhenish mystics (Eckhart,
Tauler, etc.) brought up under the influence of the school of Co-
logne etc. where Albert the Great taught, were strongly Domini-
can and Dionysian, with an intellectual stress, even a speculative
character, that prevented their Dionysian trend from becoming
exclusively affective and anti-intellectual. Normally, we find that
the mystics of darkness of the Rhenish and English schools are
strongly Thomistic. Note: the chief English work in the Dionysian
tradition is the anonymous Cloud of Unknowing (fourteenth cen-
tury), whose author was familiar with the Rhenish mystics and
also translated the Mystica Theologia of Dionysius into English
(Denys Hid Divinitie).
The anti-intellectual current: through the fourteenth and fif-
teenth centuries the Dionysian stream passes also among the more
anti-intellectual and affective writers of the devotional type, includ-
ing Franciscans. Gerson, strongly opposed to the Rhenish mystics,
is nevertheless a Dionysian, stressing love and affectivity.433 Henry
Herp (Harphius) (d. 1477), a Franciscan, now little known and
studied, is a very important figure434 among what we are calling
the “affective Dionysians.” Having received the influence of
Denys through Ruysbroeck, he actually goes against many of the
fundamental doctrines of Ruysbroeck while considering him still
431. Hugh of Balma, cited in Philippe, col. 1977.

432. Itinerarium, 7.4 (apex affectus) (Opera Omnia, 5.312) (cited in Turbessi,
col. 349); see also Sermo V in Epiphania (Opera Omnia, 9:162): “Apex mentis, quod
est summum ipsius animae et quasi centrum, in quo recolliguntur omnes aliae vires”
(“the apex of the mind, which is the high point and center, as it were, of the soul
itself, in which are gathered all other powers”).
433. See André Combs, “Contemplation: . . . in Occident: 4. Gerson,” DS
3, 365–75.
434. See Combs, “Contemplation: . . . in Occident: 6. Harphius,” DS 3,
378–83.
his master. {The} Theologia Mystica of Herp {is} actually a compila-

tion of texts from Herp made by Carthusians of Cologne; in it we
have a mixture of St. Bernard, Gerson, Ruysbroeck and Hugh de
Balma. The cosmic love of Denys comes back into prominence.
There is a union of the positive and negative aspects of Dionysius.
The influence of Herp and the Rhenish mystics traveled to Spain
and blossomed out in Osuna and De Laredo435 who in their turn
prepared the way for the great Carmelite mystics of the sixteenth
century.
VIII. Western Mysticism

We have already seen that the mystical tradition of Pseudo-
Denys is very important in the West and gains importance in the
Middle Ages. It must also be recalled here that {a major figure
is} Cassian, who, although opposed to Augustine in the semi-
pelagian controversy, remained one of the great spiritual masters
of the West, particularly of the monastic West. Through Cassian
the primitive tradition of Christian mysticism, as represented in
St. Gregory of Nyssa and Evagrius, and stemming from Origen,
passes on down through the West. Of the Western Fathers, the
closest to Cassian is probably St. Gregory the Great. In speaking
of Western mysticism we have then to take into account the Bene-
dictine tradition, through Cassian and Gregory, which provides
a kind of solid substratum to mystical spirituality throughout
the Middle Ages. But the solidity of this substratum is due in
large measure to the Desert Fathers and to the Evagrian-Cappa-
docian-Origenist tradition. It can be said that the Benedictine
monastic tradition in the West keeps alive all that is most solid,
fundamental and traditional in Christian asceticism and mysti-
cism of the fourth century, and this tradition comes to life with
the various monastic revivals. Hence there is very much of it to be
found in the mysticism of the twelfth-century Cistercians. In
435. See Jean Krynon, “Contemplation: D. Au 16e Siècle: 1. En Espagne

avant Saint Jean de la Croix: 2°. Les Maitres: Osuna et Laredo,” DS 3, 387–94.
these there is found not only Cassian but the evident influence
of St. Gregory of Nyssa, St. Maximus and even of Origen.
In addition to this primitive current we must now account for
the dominant personal influence of the great Western Doctor of
grace and of conversion: St. Augustine. The Augustinian theol-
ogy, inseparable from the drama of Augustine’s own conversion
and of his whole life, comes to give all the spirituality of the West
a special character of its own. Although it is misleading to speak
of two separate and clearly contrasting traditions in the West,
one Augustinian and the other Dionysian, there is without doubt
this overwhelming influence of Augustine. Sometimes this influ-
ence is combined with Dionysius, sometimes with the primitive
Origenist-Cassianist tradition of the monks, sometimes with both.
But always the Augustinian spirit colors all mysticism and all
mystical theology except in rare cases, usually after the thirteenth
century. We find the Augustinian dominance everywhere: in the
Victorines, though they also popularize Denys; in the Cistercians,
though they keep alive the deep Cassianist-Origenist tradition;
in the Franciscans, especially through St. Bonaventure. (Note: St.
Augustine also dominates all Franciscan theology and philoso-
phy in the schools.) The Dominicans begin to break away from
the dominance of Augustine and it is in the Rhenish mystics,
largely under Dominican influence or actually Dominicans them-
selves, that we see Dionysius preponderant over Augustine. Yet
the influence of Augustine remains clear.
Speaking of the Rhenish mystics, we might mention here
a technical distinction that has been made between “bridal mysti-
cism” (brautmystik) and “being mysticism” (wesenmystik):436
a) Bridal mysticism {is} affective, cataphatic, erotic, a mysti-
cism of desire and espousal, {with a} stress on the faculties of the
soul, especially the will; {it is} generally Augustinian {and} tends
to be anti-intellectual.
436. See J.-B. P[orion], Hadewijch d’Anvers: Poèmes des Béguines (Paris: Édi-
tions du Seuil, 1954), 17–19.
b) Wesenmystik {is} speculative, ontological, {emphasizing}

union in the substance of the soul, more immediate, {highlight-
ing} the apex mentis; {it is} apophatic but not necessarily anti-intel-
lectual; {it} transcends {the} division of intellect and will, {and is}
generally Dionysian.
Since in treating Western mysticism we are on more familiar
ground we can work faster {and} not {be} concerned with too
many details. What follows is a broad outline.
The Background of Western Mysticism:
A. The Pelagian controversy about grace created problems
and emphases which were less noticeable in the East. {There was
a} difficulty of adjustment of notions of grace and asceticism. {The}
root problem {was} the part that must be played by our own ef-
fort in the spiritual life. {There are} oscillations between excessive
confidence in our own efforts and a carelessness due to misplaced
confidence in grace—without fidelity to grace. In the West the
question: “What should I do? How much effort should I make?
What is the proper balance between God’s action and my action?”
tends to become a burning one. Note that this problem largely
remains dormant until it bursts into full flame with the Augustin-
ian Friar, Martin Luther.
B. Pessimism of Montanists and Manichaeans: Tertullian, who
retained a great influence in the West in spite of his heresy, re-
jected the created world as evil. He insisted on an absolute opposi-
tion between the Gospel and the world. {He had a} juridical spirit
{and stressed the} idea of merit. The spirit of Tertullian combines
extreme rigorism with brutality in controversy, the ready assump-
tion that the adversary is a heretic or a crook, that he is a fool, or
in bad faith. Note {that} this adversary is not a pagan or a Jew
but a fellow Christian. {For} the Manichaeans, the power of God
is shared with an eternal evil principle. {They preach a} rejection
of sacramental life, clergy, etc. This smoulders until {the} twelfth
century and then bursts out, {to be} violently repressed by arms
and {the} Inquisition.
Note {also the example of} Jerome: his extremely active life
{is} marked by incessant conflicts and disputes. {He is} the father
of a tradition of monastic mandarins, a complete stranger to mysti-
cism, {even} hostile to it. In rejecting Origen he was also rejecting
all mysticism except what could be contemplated in the prophets:
mysticism was for them, not for us.
In a word, the background of Western spirituality we find
{marked by} this uneasy division and anxiety on the question of
grace and effort, along with tendencies to activism, to violent con-
troversy (not lacking in the East either), to pessimism, to a juridical
and authoritarian outlook, and a pronounced anti-mystical current.
The West is then to a certain extent predisposed to:
a) water down mysticism, and accept it in a diluted, more

devotional form, or else reduce mysticism to speculation and
study;
b) insist on social forms, rules, observances, practices, rites
(this is by no means lacking in the East either).
These trends will be assimilated or opposed by Augustine in
various degrees, and he himself will add other new elements that
will give Western mysticism its own character.
A. St. Augustine—Life and background: {Augustine was}
born {in} 354 of a pagan father and {a} Christian mother. {He was
enrolled as a} catechumen as a child, but due to {a} pagan edu-
cation fell into {an} immoral life. At 19 {he} reads {the} Hortensius
of Cicero and starts seeking wisdom. {He} makes a first attempt
with the Bible but is bored with it. {He} is in practical despair of
ever being pure. {He} becomes a Manichaean for nine years.
(Note {the} connection with his personal problem.) {In} 383, at
29, he goes to Rome. Having dropped Manichaeism, {he} cannot
accept Christianity, and is close to despair. At Milan, {he is} im-
pressed by St. Ambrose, especially his preaching on the typology
of Scripture. {He} turns to Christianity intellectually and at the
same time discovers Plotinus. {The} Epistles of Paul complete his
moral conversion; {the} Vita Antonii strengthens and confirms his
high Christian ideal. {In} 387, on the Easter Vigil, {the} night of
April 24-25, {he is} baptized at Milan. {He} forms {a} monastic
community at Tagaste ({where he} lives {a} contemplative life
{for} four years). {In} 391 {he is ordained} priest. {He} comments
on {the} Psalms ({the} summit of his mysticism). {He was or-
dained a} Bishop {in} 395, {and} died 28 August 430.
The personality of Augustine and his Mysticism: the drama and
conflict of Augustine not only profoundly and definitively shaped
his own spirituality, but through him reached down to most of
the medieval mystics of the Christian West.
a) His mysticism is highly reflexive and subjective. All that is

said about subjective piety in the West, all the attempts to lay the
blame on this or that later mystic, remind us to look to Augustine
as to the real source. And yet Augustine was one of the great Fathers
of the age when liturgical life flourished in its purity. His “subjectiv-
ism” is obviously quite compatible with a deep sacramental and
liturgical piety and above all with a profound sense of the Church. To
this extent there is a “synthesis” in Augustine born of the fervor of
his love. It may even be said that perhaps it was the psychological
intuitions and sensitivity of Augustine that enabled him to be so
keenly aware of the nature of the Church as the Mystical Body, One
in the charity of Christ. Perhaps the fact remains that his is a litur-
gical piety rather than a liturgical mysticism.
b) His mysticism is therefore closely bound up with psycho-
logical observation, especially reflection on the workings of mysti-
cal experience, its roots, etc.
c) This psychology reaches into his anthropology itself, with
the Trinitarian structure of the image of God in man. This is found
everywhere in the West after Augustine. It even reaches into Au-
gustine’s theology of the Trinity and consequently into the West-
ern theology of the Trinity as a whole (the Word as the “thought”
of the Father, the Holy Spirit as the love of the Father and the Son,
hence proceeding from both the Father and the Son).
d) The drama of the struggle with evil and the ascent to happiness
in love and ecstasy in Augustine’s own life affects his mysticism
and that of all the West after him:
1. The starting point {is} a longing for happiness in God, with

a despair of ever attaining that happiness because of imprison-
ment in sin, specifically sin of the flesh. Conflict between fleshly
and spiritual love becomes the basic conflict of all man’s life and
the root problem of the moral, spiritual and mystical lives.
2. The solution is not asceticism alone, because Augustine is
too conscious of his own helplessness. {He has} a sense of the utter
uselessness of man’s efforts without the special help of grace. {He
stresses} dependence on God, crying out to Him in prayer. This
dependence on grace will be one of the salient characteristics of Au-
gustinian asceticism, and of Western asceticism as a whole.
3. Hence, {there is an} ever-present consciousness of sin and
of the power of grace, {a} sense of the evil of concupiscence, and
{a} consequent pessimism about nature and natural good. {He has
a} realization that we can never fully be without faults: “It is the
mark of perfection to recognize our imperfection” (Sermon 170,
n. 8).437 The crisis of the Augustinian soul {is the} conflict between
the consciousness of sin and the awareness (memoria) of the fact
that we are made for God, in His image. But we have lost our
likeness to Him, and long to recover it. This is impossible unless
God Himself intervenes to renew the lost likeness.
4. The solution is love, and this love, produced in us by God,
gives us also joy and rest in God. Hence {there is a} tendency to
emphasize {the} experience of love, of salvation, that can be veri-
fied on reflection. This experience {is} to be nurtured by medita-
tion on {the} positive truths of theology, on the light of revelation.
It is by love, the fruit of grace, that the divine likeness is restored
to the soul. The anguish of desire fed by the memoria of our true
nature as creatures in the image of God is appeased by the action
of the will seeking to see Him above the intelligence and all created
things.
5. Hence the ascent to God {progresses}: infra se—from infe-
rior and exterior creatures (sensible, vestiges of God); intra se—to
437. PL 38, col. 931.

oneself, the soul as image of God; supra se—to God Himself,

above the soul.438
6. Interior unity: the three faculties of the soul, intellect, mem-
ory and will, correspond to the three divine Persons. In contem-
plation they are brought into perfect unity, and the Holy Trinity
is mirrored within the soul by its perfect unity. Hence the mysticism
of Augustine is centered within the self, the true spiritual
self no doubt, but the self as mirror of God.
7. This interior unity is reached by gratuitous and pure love—
loving God because He is God, He is our all, seeking no other
reward than Him, therefore praising Him with pure praise: gratis
amo quod laudo.439
8. Yet nevertheless this produces the only true rest of our
soul. Fecisti nos ad Te, et inquietum est cor nostrum, donec requi-
escat in Te.440
9. The purity of our love for God implies equally love of our-
selves in and for God, and of our brother in and for God. {It means}
humility and fraternal union without envy, in pure love of {one’s}
brother, the doctrine that I share all my brother’s good by charity,
and he mine. Love is everything: Dilige et quod vis fac.441
10. The summit of love is contemplation, in which the joys
of the senses and of fleshly love are exchanged for the joys of
spiritual experience and love. God is perceived by the “spiritual
senses” as a light, as a voice, as perfume, as food, as an embrace.
{There is an} emphasis on these positive experiences.
11. But note an apophatic element: what is experienced is in
some sense beyond experience. We do not have the Dionysian
438. “beneath oneself . . . within oneself . . . above oneself”: Augustine

does not use this precise formula, but it represents his basic pattern of spiritual
development.
439. “I gratefully love what I praise” (Enarratio in Ps. 53, n. 10 [PL 36, col.
626]).
440. “You have made us for yourself and our heart is restless until it rests
in you” (Confessions, 1.1 [PL 32, col. 661]).
441. “Love and do what you will” (Homilies on 1 John, 7:8 [PL 35, col.
2033]).
vocabulary of darkness, but there is nevertheless an essential

element of nescience or unknowing. Nescio quam dulcedinem.442
. . . Nescio quam occultam voluptatem. . . .443 However this is
always corrected with reference to a higher light: Delectatio cordis
humani de lumine veritatis.444
e) The summit of spiritual experience is vivid and transient,
“like lightning.”445 It is an immediate experience, often a touch
arousing awe, a presence causing a passively received delight.
Note {that} Augustine never experienced a direct intuition of the
divine essence, but believed such an intuition possible even in
this life. This is important because in the West, as a result of this,
there is always the strong hope, based on {the} conviction of its
possibility, of very positive experiences of God or the divine light,
presence and sweetness, in love. Later this will be transferred to
a special conviction of the possibility of intimate experience of
fruitive love for the person of Jesus Christ. In a word, it becomes
characteristic of Western mysticism to emphasize a real embrace
of love really experienced with God really present in a concrete
form as light or some other positive attribute. The experience of
God above forms, in darkness, beyond knowledge, tends to be
set aside. But this positive experience is always in the mirror
of the soul, hence what it tends to reduce itself to is a created
effect in the soul of the contemplative and that effect is a divinely
given love produced directly by grace. Hence Augustinian con-
templation tends to be a direct experience of love as a miracle of
grace in the soul and as the manifestation of God’s loving pres-
ence, as a means of contact with Him. In what sense is this
442. “I know not what sweetness” (Confessions 10:40 [PL 32, col. 807]).
443. “I know not what hidden pleasure . . .” (Enarratio in Ps. 41, n. 9,
which reads: “nescio et . . .” [PL 36, col. 470]).
444. “The delight of the human heart from the light of truth” (Sermo 179.6,
which reads: “Delectatio enim . . .” [PL 38, col. 969]).
445. See Confessions, VII, c. xvii (23) (PL 32, col. 745): “Et pervenit ad id quod
est, in ictu trepidantis aspectus” (“And it reached that which is, in the flash of a
trembling glance”).
immediate??? Ecstasis—at the summit of all is an ecstasy beyond

all images (this expression is not Dionysian but came to Augustine
from the neo-Platonists). Alienatio a sensibus corporis ut spiritus
hominis Divino Spiritu assumptus capiendis atque intuendis imagini-
bus vacet.446
Note {a} comparison of Augustine with {the} Greek Fathers:
If to any man the tumult of the flesh be silent, if fantasies of

earth and air and sea be silent also, if the poles of heaven
be silent and the very soul of man be silent to itself, and by
not thinking pass beyond itself, if all dreams be silent and
all such things as be revealed by the imagination, if every
tongue and every sign and every thing that hath its exis-
tence by passing-on be silent wholly unto any man . . .
if then He only speak, not by them but by Himself, that
we may hear His word not by tongue of flesh nor voice of
angel nor by the sound of a cloud that is broken by thun-
der nor by the dark riddle of a similitude, and we may
hear Him, Whom in these things we love, Himself, apart
from them . . . and this alone might so transport and swal-
low up and wrap him who beheld it in these intrinsical
joys, so that his life might be for all eternity such as was
this moment of understanding . . . would not this be that
whereof is written: “Enter thou into the joy of thy Lord”?
(from Augustine’s Confessions,447 quoted in Colledge, The
Medieval Mystics of England, p. 90).
This text contains familiar neo-Platonic ideas common to {the}

Greek and Latin Fathers. It is quite general. Anyone could have
written it; {there is} little to distinguish Augustine particularly.
We must consider the whole question of approach. Compare:
446. “Separation from the bodily senses so that the human spirit, taken
over by the Divine Spirit, might be empty of all images to be received and seen”
(De Diversis Quaestionibus, 2.1 [PL 40, col. 129]).
447. Confessions Bk. 9, c. 10, n. 25 (PL 32, cols. 774–75).
St. Augustine St. Gregory of Nyssa

a) ascent—extra se a) light
intra se cloud
supra se darkness
b) subjective, reflexive, dialectical, b) less personal and subjective,
psychological more ontological
c) cataphatic—culminating in c) beyond apophasis
(possible) intuition of {the}
divine essence
d) personal crisis and drama of d) experience not of crisis but of
Augustine gives orientation to {a} return to Paradise; normal
his mysticism state {is} optimism about
nature
Hence at the summit of Augustinian contemplation there is

an immediate union with God in ecstasy, immediate in the sense
that it is without any sensible form or image but in the direct em-
brace of love (how intellectual?). Contact with God {comes} by
love, beyond sense and vision, out of oneself; raptus supra se448 is
then what is meant by immediate union with God in the Augus-
tinian context. At the same time we might still consider that love
itself were a medium, a created effect. {The} solution {is that} re-
flection on the experience of love is of course mediate. Ecstatic
love is an immediate contact with God Who is love (though
grace always remains in some sense a created medium). This is
apparently beyond reflection, until after it has gone.
f) The Mysticism of the Church in Augustine: what has been
said so far does not show the greatness of Augustine. In these
matters he compares perhaps unfavorably with some of the great
Eastern mystics. What is important is the reality of his vision of the
Church, of his mysticism of humility and charity leading to the
experience of Christ, the humility of God in the humility of the
Church, as a visible social entity functioning in history for the
salvation of mankind.
448. “rapt above itself” (the exact phrase is not found in Augustine).
1) Humility {is} the great characteristic of the Incarnation, and

pride in man is the great tragedy, {the} refusal of God’s humble
love. This refusal is a refusal of the humility of the Church.
2) Mutual need, mutual love, mutual prayer is the strength
of the Church. Quia ergo in Christo vos amamus, in Christo nos re-
damate, et amor noster pro invicem gemat ad Deum (In Joan. VI.1).449
{This means} going to Christ together, supporting one another.
The humility and love in the relation of the bishop to his priests
and flock is an epiphany of Christ.
The role of the Church in contemplation for Augustine is
clearly described in the commentary on Psalm 4l (Quemadmodum
desiderat).450 This enarration on the Psalm is one {of} the primary
sources for Augustine’s mystical doctrine, comparable to the vi-
sion at Ostia.451 In this commentary Augustine speaks of seeking
God in creation, outside himself, of seeking God within himself,
and of ascending to the brief glimpse of the contemplation of
heaven in which God is enjoyed (fruitio). The key concept of the
commentary is that the transition to the glimpse of heaven is
made through an intuition of God’s beauty in the Church, in the
virtues of the faithful. Hence what is characteristic of Augustine is
the communal orientation of his desire for mystical union, his
stress on love, on thirst for God, a thirst that is shared, and in-
creased by being shared, helping all on toward an enjoyment
which is all the greater for being shared. It is to be observed,
however, that on this level, the intuition of the Church, we have
simply a variant of theoria physike. The highest experience, ecstasy,
is transcendent for Augustine as for all the mystics, and is beyond
distinction between persons, beyond the self as distinct from
other selves.
449. “Therefore, because we love you in Christ, love us in Christ in return,

and our love for one another may breathe forth to God” (PL 35, col. 1425).
450. PL 36, cols. 464–76.
451. See Confessions, Bk. 9, c. 10, nn. 23–26 (PL 32, cols. 773–75); this is the
famous account of the mystical experience shared by Augustine and his mother
Monica shortly before her death.
{Here are} some characteristic passages from {the} Enarratio

in Ps. 41 (see {the} translation in Butler, Western Mysticism, p. 21
ff.): Introductory (n. 2): “Come my brethren, catch my eagerness;
share with me this my longing, let us both love [simul amemus],
let us be influenced with this thirst, let us hasten to the well of
understanding.”452 Characteristic of Augustine is this longing for
divine light, longing for love, longing for experience, thirst, desire.
“Long for this light, for a certain fountain, a certain light, such as
thy bodily eyes know not [note a certain apophatic quality]; a
light, to see which the inward eye must be prepared; a fountain,
to drink of which the inward thirst must be kindled. Run to the
fountain; long for the fountain . . . etc.”453 He then says we must
run “like the hart,”454 which, according to myth, kills serpents.
That is to say, we must kill our vices. {Here is the} traditional
theme of purification from passion necessary for contemplation.
(Butler omits a very important part of the sermon [n. 4], the
thought that when harts [stags] are crossing a river together, they
rest their heads upon the backs of those in front of them and swim
across helping one another, and the one at the head of the line, if
he gets tired, goes to the end and rests his head on the last one.
“To such stags the apostle speaks, saying: bear ye one another’s
burdens.”455) After purity of heart has been attained, the contem-
plative must “pour out his soul above himself”456 and come to the
“house of God.”457 He only comes to the “high and secret place”458
of God’s house by passing through His tabernacle on earth, which
is the Church. “It is here that He is to be sought for; it is here that
452. Butler, Western Mysticism, 21, which reads: “. . . share with me in this
. . . let us both be influenced . . . let us both hasten . . .”
453. Butler, Western Mysticism, 21, which reads: “Long thou for . . . thirst
is to be kindled . . . ”
455. PL 36, col. 466.
456. Butler, Western Mysticism, 22, which reads: “poured out my soul
above myself” (n. 8).
457. Butler, Western Mysticism, 22, which reads: “house of my God” (n. 8).
458. Butler, Western Mysticism, 22, which reads: “high in secret place” (n. 9).
is found the way by which we arrive at His house.”459 Admiration

of the tabernacle prepares us for ecstasy. “It was thus, that whilst
admiring the members of the tabernacle, he was led on to the
house of God: by following the leadings of a certain delight,
an inward mysterious and hidden pleasure, as if from the
house of God there sounded sweetly some instrument; and
. . . following the guidance of the sound, withdrawing himself
from all noise of flesh and blood, made his way on even to the
house of God.”460 The sounds of the perpetual festivity in the
house of God are heard by those who withdraw from the noise
of the world and walk apart in His tabernacle. It awakens their
longing and they seek after it with thirst and desire. To attain to
the House of God one must, however, transcend the tabernacle.
This “Churchly” dimension of the Augustinian experience
is what saves it from subjectivity. This must be remembered. In
the context of the Church the love received from God through the
Church can be accepted without hesitation and without question.
It is the real and genuine expression of Christ living in us, the
same who is in ourselves, in our brethren, and in the whole
Church—and in heaven. Hence in this love we transcend ourselves.
Without the context of love in the Mystical Body, reflection on
our inner experience of love would be merely subjective fixation
on our own psychological experiences.
Rising above change and flesh, the soul attains to a fleeting
perception of the Unchangeable. Compare {this} with the vision
at Ostia:
We were discoursing together alone, very sweetly, and we

were enquiring between ourselves in the presence of the
Truth, which Thou art, of what sort the eternal life of the
saints was to be. With the lips of our souls we panted for the
heavenly streams of Thy fountain, the fountain of life which
459. Butler, Western Mysticism, 23, which reads: “. . . sought, for it is in the
tabernacle that . . . at the house” (n. 9).
460. Butler, Western Mysticism, 23 (n. 9).
is with Thee, that, sprinkled with that water to the mea-

sure of our capacity, we might attain some poor conception
of that glorious theme. And as our converse drew to this
conclusion, that the sweetest conceivable delight of sense
in the brightest conceivable earthly sunshine was not to be
compared, no, nor even named, with the happiness of that
life, we soared with ardent longing towards the “Self-same”
[i.e. the unchanging God], we passed from stage to stage
through all material things, through heaven itself, whence
sun and moon and stars shed their radiance upon earth.
And now we began a more inward ascent, by thinking and
speaking and marvelling at Thy works. And so we came to
our own minds, and we passed beyond them, that we might
come unto the region of unfailing plenty, where Thou feed-
est Israel for ever with the food of truth. There Life is the
wisdom by which all things come to be, both those that have
been and those that are to be; and the Life itself never comes
to be, but is as it was and shall be ever more, because in it
is neither past nor future but present only, for it is eternal.
And as we talked and yearned after it, we touched it—and
hardly touched it—with the full beat (toto ictu) of our heart.
And we sighed and left there impawned the firstfruits of
the spirit, and we relapsed into articulate speech, where the
word has beginning and ending (Confessions IX.23, 24,461
quoted in Butler, Western Mysticism, p. 32).
Here instead of the “tabernacle” and the virtues of all the faithful,
it is Monica herself who serves as the medium to prepare for the
contemplative experience: more accurately it is their common
love, which serves them as a stepping stone to a kind of ecstatic
glimpse of the “Self-same.” It is to be noted however that this is
not a pure description of mystical ecstasy, but it still savors much
more of theoria physike if not of Platonist dialectic. It would be
difficult to call Augustine the “Prince of Mystics” (Butler)462 on
the basis of these passages.
461. PL 32, col. 774 (c. 10).

B. Western Mysticism: Butler’s Thesis. Let us examine here

briefly the arguments advanced by Cuthbert Butler. The whole
purpose of his book, doubtless a good one, is to reestablish the
rights of traditional Benedictine mysticism and contemplation.
He is defending the monastic contemplation of the Middle Ages,
based on Gregory, Augustine and Bernard, {contrasting it} with
modern mysticism which is either a mysticism of night like that
of St. John of the Cross or a mysticism of visions, like that of so
many modern saints and mystics with a capital M. Butler’s thesis,
without being aggressively dedicated to the task of proving West-
ern mysticism absolutely better, certainly presupposes that the
mysticism of Augustine etc. is more germane to us in the West,
more natural to us, more proper to us, and that we should be
formed according to this tradition first of all. Let us examine his
arguments and evaluate their worth. According to Butler,463
“Western mysticism” has the following characteristics:
1. It is pre-Dionysian: that is to say, it is a “pure” Western
form of mysticism that antedates the influence of Pseudo-Denys
in the West (medieval).
a) Dionysian mysticism is a mysticism of darkness, says
Butler. Western mysticism is a mysticism of light: “Contemplation
is a revelation of light and knowledge and fullness.”464 Criticism:
Pseudo-Denys combines a cataphatic theology and an apophatic
theology, and the summit is a synthesis of both, going beyond
both, to a “supersplens lumen.”465 Hence Butler’s division is not
accurate.
b) The Dionysian influence in the West is treated as a kind
of irruption of neo-Platonism into the West. Criticism: Augustine
was just as much a neo-Platonist as Denys. The contention
that the mysticism of Augustine, Gregory and Bernard is pre-
Dionysian needs to be qualified. There are certain traces of Denys
463. Butler, Western Mysticism, 123–28.

465. “light beyond light”; the terminology is Dionysian, though the exact
phrasing is not his.
in Bernard and even Gregory. The real problem is not the division
between Augustinian (Western) and Dionysian (Eastern) mysti-
cism: but to bring out the primitive tradition of the East and West
united in one like Cassian, and complicated by Augustine and later
by Dionysian writers of the Middle Ages who were themselves more
Augustinian than Dionysian in any case.
2. It is pre-scholastic: this is correct. The Victorines begin
already to treat mysticism systematically. The scholastics tend to
institute a science of contemplation. Augustine, Gregory and Ber-
nard are interested in contemplation itself, not in writing about
the science of contemplation. However let us remember that the
followers of the Victorines and other mystical writers who were
themselves Augustinian, preserved the interest in contemplation,
but tended more and more to oppose it to theology and science. It
was certainly due to the influence of Augustinianism more than
to that of Denys that scientific theology and mystical theology
parted company in the Middle Ages. Both however were respon-
sible. Most responsible of all were the scholastics themselves and
the Aristotelians.
3. It is without visions and revelations: this is true. The
visions and extraordinary graces attributed to Bernard are of
course to be taken into account, but they are quite separate
from his own writing and may be apocryphal (???). Note however
that the visionaries of the thirteenth century on tend to be very
much influenced by the Augustinian-Gregorian-Bernardine tradi-
tion and to be formed in it, for instance Blessed Juliana,466 {an}
466. The reference is to Blessed Juliana of Mont Cornillon, or of Liège,

who is credited with initiating the feast of Corpus Christi; she is said to have
learned more than twenty of St. Bernard’s sermons on the Canticle by heart, and
her most famous vision was of the moon crossed with a black stripe, which she
eventually came to understand as a symbol of the liturgical year without the
feast of Corpus Christi. See the Vita B. Julianiae, Book I, c. 1, and Book II, c. 2, in
Acta Sanctorum, ed. Ioannis Carnandet, Aprilis (Tomus I) (Paris & Rome: Victor
Palmé, 1866), 444D, 457D; an English translation is now available: The Life of
Juliana of Mont Cornillon, trans. Barbara Newman (Toronto: Peregrina, 1991).
Augustinian nun, who knew many sermons of St. Bernard by

heart, and was a visionary.
4. No ecstasies affecting the body {are found}: this is cor-
rect, but again it is in the tradition of Augustine/Bernard/Greg-
ory that the ecstatic trend is most clearly developed in the Middle
Ages.
5. {There is} no diabolism: this is not fully correct. There is
no pathological diabolism. But see the Dialogues of St. Gregory,
even in the Life of St. Benedict. There are at least as many appear-
ances of or frays with the devil as there are mystical experiences
recorded, perhaps more; I have not counted them. As for the later
monks, just see {the} Exordium Magnum 467 and Caesar of
Heisterbach!!468
6. {There are} no quasi-hypnotic symptoms: this appears
to be a gratuitous dig at the Byzantine hesychasts and is not
worth bothering with. The hesychasts were not hypnotizing
themselves.
C. Western Mysticism: Further Notes on Latin Mysti-
cism—The Franciscan Movement
Enough has been said, in speaking of the Victorines, etc., to
get a general idea of the Latin mysticism of the Middle Ages.
Space does not permit details here. A few notes must suffice. Our
approach is now going to be historical more than anything else.
{It is} vitally important to understand the unparalleled awaken-
ing of popular mysticism, both orthodox and heretical, and to
try to apprehend something of its tremendous significance. The
467. Conrad of Eberbach, Exordium Magnum Cisterciense, ed. Bruno Gries

ser, Corpus Christianorum Continuatio Medievalis [CCCM], vol. 138 (Turnholt:
Brepols, 1994); ET: The Great Beginnings of Cîteaux: The Exordium Magnum of Con-
rad of Eberbach, trans. Benedicta Ward and Paul Savage, CF 72 (Kalamazoo: Cis-
tercian Publications, 2006).
468. Caesarii Heisterbacensis Monachi Ordinis Cisterciensis Dialogus Miraculo-
rum, ed. Joseph Strange (Coloniae: J. M. Heberle, 1851); ET: Caesarius of Heister-
bach, The Dialogue on Miracles, trans. H. Scott and C. C. Swinton, 2 vols. (London:
Routledge, 1929); see also the De Daemonibus (Sui Demòni, ed. with Italian trans.
by Sonia Maura Barillari [Alessandria: Edizioni dell’Orso, 1999]).
way was prepared by the monastic mysticism of the Cistercians

and Benedictines and the ferment of monastic reform in the elev-
enth and twelfth centuries; above all the personal impact of St.
Bernard, the “friend of God,”469 on the populations of all parts of
Western Europe, prepared the way. Note: {there were} many vi-
sionaries contemporary with St. Bernard, v.g., St. Hildegard.
{There was} a reawakening of the sense of charismatic mission and
of prophecy as opposed to the clerical and hierarchical structure
of Christendom. Everyone was by now disillusioned with clergy
and religious who were to become more and more lax in spite of
great waves of reform.
The Cistercians (of whom we will treat extensively else-
where470) represent the fine flower of medieval monastic spiritu-
ality and mysticism. {Theirs was} a Biblical mysticism, centered
on the mystery of Christ, a traditional mysticism, centered on the
ancient way handed down by Cassian, St. Gregory the Great and
the Benedictines, with a generous admixture of all that is best in
Augustine and some notable traces of Dionysius. {It was} a school
of experience, in which personal experience is not so much ana-
lyzed and dissected, as expressed fully and poetically in the tradi-
tional images and terms of Scripture. Hence the character of
Cistercian mysticism is to relive the Scriptural mysteries in one’s
own personal life, without undue subjectivism. {It was} a school
of love, centered on the idea of the recovery of the lost likeness to
God, the restoration of the image which is in us by nature. {There
is need to} stress the wholeness and originality and sanity of the
Cistercian school. {The} originality of particular authors, especially
William of St. Thierry and Isaac of Stella, {is} worthy of a very
469. See A. Chiquot, “Amis de Dieu,” DS 1, col. 493.

470. Merton’s course entitled “Cistercian Fathers and Monastic Theology,”
given to the novices in 1963, is found in volume 20 of the Gethsemani “Collected
Essays” collection; Merton also gave conferences to the novices, evidently be-
gun in the latter part of 1961 (see Turning Toward the World, 125 [June 10, 1961]),
on “The Cistercian Order from the Death of St. Bernard to the Reform of Bene-
dict XII,” also found in volume 20 of “Collected Essays.”
detailed study; St. Bernard of course needs no introduction here.

The Cistercian heritage goes down not only in the Franciscan tradi-
tion but also among the Flemish, German and English mystics.
Joachim of Flora: one great Cistercian who is usually neglected,
and whose memory has been systematically suppressed because
of the condemnation of his writings, {is} Joachim of Flora, the
prophet. He is one of the most important figures in the Middle Ages.
His mysticism is somewhat heterodox and apocalyptic, and cer-
tainly he is not a model to be followed in the contemplative life.
He may well have been a false mystic, though there is no ques-
tion of his sincerity or subjective probity. We will not discuss his
mysticism here—what matters is the immense influence it exercised.
Born in Calabria in 1132, Joachim was more subject to Byzantine
influences than to those from northern Europe, France, etc. How-
ever he was regarded as a successor to St. Bernard as {a} preacher
and mystical reformer of the Church. {In} 1178, when Abbot of
Corrazzo, {he} received papal permission to withdraw to a her-
mitage and write his prophetic books. These are a powerful criti-
cism of the clergy and its corruption, and point, as divine remedy,
to a providential cleansing and a destruction of institutional
Christianity, to be replaced by the “Eternal Gospel” of the Holy
Ghost. Joachim foretold a new age of “love and freedom” as op-
posed to authority and despotism. The Church was, in the new
age of the Holy Spirit, to be ruled by contemplatives, and by the
Holy Spirit through them. Especially {he} foretold two new or-
ders: this was taken to be a prophetic prediction of the coming
of the Mendicants. Joachim dies in the odor of sanctity in 1202.
His doctrines were developed by disciples. Dante places Joachim
in the twelfth circle of heaven,471 that of the “Prudent”—with St.
Bonaventure, St. Thomas, St. Anselm, Hugh of St. Victor, etc.
The Franciscan movement is especially tied up with the
Joachimite prophecies, and when the crisis of the order ensued,
471. Joachim is actually in the fourth circle, the Heaven of the Sun, but it is
in Canto XII of the Paradiso (ll. 140-42) that he is mentioned (by St. Bonaventure)
(Singleton, Paradiso, 139).
the Spiritual Franciscans looked back to Joachim for their inspira-

tion and carried on a bitter struggle, convinced that they had a
mission to carry out what he had predicted. This in turn spread
and continued on down through the fourteenth and fifteenth
centuries and undoubtedly contributed to the breakaway of the
Protestants from the Church. Whatever may be the Church’s
judgement on Joachim (his ideas were condemned but his holiness
was approved, and nothing has ever been said to impugn his
honesty or rectitude), it is certainly true that he had a historic and
mighty influence which cannot be ignored and should not be too
contemptuously dismissed, even though he may have been in
great part deluded. His “mission” may not have been directly the
work of the Holy Ghost through a true prophet, but there was an
element of natural prophetism that responded to the unconscious
aspirations and drives of Western history—at least this.
Pourrat472 attributes the appearance of flagellantes to the in-
fluence of Joachim. Certainly many obscure and heterodox popu-
lar movements responded to his influence. On the other hand he
was not alone by any means. There were many more heterodox
and really heretical movements in the twelfth century, marked
by rejection of some of the most important doctrines of the
Church, the throwing off of all authority, and frank rebellion.
Mention need only be made of Arnold of Brescia, the Waldensians,
the Albigensians. The fact that in a time when these movements
were hated and violently repressed by the Church, Joachim was
accepted, trusted and blessed by the popes is surely of signifi-
cance. He must not be loosely equated with the heretics. He was
universally respected and approved by the Church, and his work
was posthumously condemned only after his disciples had
caused it to be interpreted in dangerous ways, and hotheads had
in fact appealed to him to justify rebellion.
472. Pierre Pourrat, Christian Spirituality, vol. 2: In the Middle Ages, trans. S.
P. Jacques (1927; Westminster, MD: Newman, 1953), 80.
The most important aspect of the new piety was the devel-
opment of the consciousness of the laity as a vital and important
force in Catholic life. This went hand in hand with the develop-
ment of the communes, with a growing disrespect for traditional
forms of authority, and for the clergy, with a new sense of the
evangelical aspect of Christian life. It was combined with grow-
ing individualism. Individualism is today a “bad word.” How-
ever this growth was necessary and inevitable at that time. The
Middle Ages witnessed the spontaneous and universal growth
of “modern forms of piety” outside the liturgy: devotion to the
Eucharist, the Holy Name, to Our Lady (on a larger, more uni-
versal scale), to saints and angels, etc.
St. Francis: in the midst of all the turbulent and confusing
movements that expressed the new awakening of the laity and
the yearning for a more evangelical life, St. Francis represented
at once the perfect expression of Christian poverty and humility
united with complete obedience and devotion to the Church. Note
the crucial importance of the ideal and mystique of poverty. It is
the very heart of late medieval mysticism from the Franciscans
on down through the Rhenish and English mystics to the six-
teenth-century Carmelites, in varying forms: from the stripping
of all possessions and mendicancy to interior stripping, “annihila-
tion,” descent into one’s own nothingness, littleness, etc. From
the thirteenth to the sixteenth centuries and even beyond, we are
in the mysticism of poverty (significant as the counterbalance to the
great development of riches and power in {the} secular sphere).
Francis was a providential sign, raised up by the Holy Spirit, to
manifest in himself the true Christian life in all its fullness—a
perfect reproduction of the loving obedience of Christ crucified,
His self-emptying and His glorification. Francis, bearing in his
body the marks of the Passion, with his passionate love for the
Gospel, the Cross and the Church, was also a perfect witness of
the Resurrection by his paradisiacal life, his power over man and
beast, his complete and universal love, transcending suffering. Fran-
cis manifested the fullness of the reign of perfect love in a man, a
small group of men, totally dedicated to Christ, in the new way of
mendicant poverty and itinerant preaching, alternating with pe-

riods of eremitical solitude. The great mark of Francis is the perfect
synthesis of all trends and movements in the likeness to Christ,
{the} synthesis of action and contemplation, solitude and society,
obedience and freedom, homelessness and being at home every-
where, poverty and mastery over all creation, study and mysti-
cism, etc., etc. In a word, St. Francis started a charismatic
movement of spiritual reform which brought mysticism out
of the cloister and onto the highways and byways of the
world. He met and fulfilled completely all the needs that had
been awakened by Bernard, Joachim of Flora, etc., etc.
The Franciscan Crisis: while Francis was abroad, driven by
his love for souls and his charismatic zeal for the salvation of
Islam (which was certainly not understood by his contempo-
raries), his Vicar General Fr. Elias began the undermining of his
work at home, with all the solid motives of a more human wis-
dom. This crisis is tremendously important and significant to
students of spirituality, not only for the effect that it had in the
history of the Franciscans and of the Church, but for its symbolic
quality. The incident reminds us of the struggles of the Old Tes-
tament prophets against human inertia and raises the great ques-
tion of spiritual ideals: can they ever be fulfilled? Are they even
meant to be fulfilled? {Is it a matter of} the mystery and scandal
of the Franciscan ideal and the defection (?) of the first followers
of Francis? Or were they providential instruments without which
the order could not have been preserved? It was a reaction of
institutionalism, taking over where Francis had deliberately re-
frained from creating an institutional structure. {There was} a
twofold reaction against St. Francis’ own ideal:
a) Introduction of and insistence upon studies. St. Francis’

opposition to study was not devotional. He believed that the friars
could, with sufficient fervor, maintain the higher synthesis that
would keep them above the dichotomy {of} intellect vs. will, study
vs. love and devotion. His followers returned to the dichotomy
and resorted to a human synthesis which was a compromise in
the eyes of the Founder. {There was a} return to the use of money.
The building of churches and convents, including splendid ones,
{began}.
b) Emphasis {was placed} on conventual discipline (replacing
the hard but free and unpredictable life of the roads and the
hermitages). More numerous fasts (i.e. systematic penances) {were
instituted} to replace the blind spontaneous abandonment to
Providence, taking whatever was set before them.
In 1220, St. Francis reacted in characteristic fashion: follow-
ing the Gospels, he resigned in favor of Fr. Elias who was destroy-
ing his work and continued to destroy it. This was certainly not
the way of human wisdom. {In} 1224 (17 September), St. Francis
received the stigmata. {In} 1226 {he} wrote the Testament and the
Laudes Creaturarum: pure joy and perfection must be seen against
the background of suffering and defeat. But for Francis there
could no longer be any such thing as defeat. {He} died Oct. 3,
1226, listening to the reading of St. John, chapter 13. {He was}
canonized {in} 1228.
Reactions against the adaptations of Fr. Elias: Brother Leo
and the Observants continue to emphasize life in the hermitages
as against the Conventuals; {the} Capuchins develop out of the
Observants. The Spiritual Franciscans were carried away by their
singleminded obsession with poverty to the extent of putting it
above obedience to the Holy See, and even above charity (says
Vandenbroucke473). Basing themselves on Joachimist ideas, they
resisted the Holy See. They are first recognized officially in 1294,
then finally condemned after they refused to admit that the ideal
of poverty must be interpreted by the superiors of the order.
St. Bonaventure was outstanding for his spirit of moderation
and understanding. He reached a middle position and with his
prudence showed the way out of the crisis. Total poverty was
not fully compatible with a large communal organization. Where
there was an institution the emphasis naturally fell back on in-

terior poverty and obedience. Let us briefly outline some of the

main themes in Bonaventure’s mysticism (cf. E. Longpré in DS).474
St. Bonaventure, the “Seraphic Doctor,” {created} the great Fran-
ciscan synthesis, {which was} essentially mystical. The Word
teaches man three kinds of theology, says Bonaventure: (1) specu-
lative (propria)—rendering truths of faith intelligible; (2) symbolic
theology, by exemplarism, leads to union with God by universal
analogy; (3) mystical—{which} leads to {the} ecstasy of love.
{There is an overarching} unity. (Note: all science leads to mysti-
cal contemplation, {according to the} De Reductione Artium ad
Theologiam.) “Ut per propriam recte utamur intelligibilibus, symboli-
cam {recte utamur} sensibilibus, mysticam rapiamur ad supermentales
excessus” (Itinerarium Mentis in Deum, I).475 Tota mystica theologia
consistit in dilectione excessiva secundum triplicem Viam: purga-
tivam, illuminativam et perfectam (In Luc.).476 Grace re-creates {the}
soul in {the} image of {the} Holy Trinity; virtues rectify the powers
of the soul; sacraments heal wounds and strengthen {the} soul;
gifts and beatitudes lead to perfection according to {the} direc-
tives of God’s will. The soul recovers {the} faculty of contempla-
tion lost by original sin. St. Francis is the model of Christian
perfection and contemplation, after Christ Himself. {The} purga-
tive {and} illuminative ways {are} characterized by {the} action
and initiative of {the} soul, {the} unitive way {by} passivity of {the}
soul under {the} action of grace, {marked by the} primacy of love
474. E. Longpré, ofm, “Bonaventure,” DS 1, cols. 1708–1843.

475. “that through theology proper we might rightly use intelligible things,
through symbolic theology we might properly use sensible things, through
mystical theology we might be lifted up to raptures beyond the mind” (Itin. 1.7
[Opera Omnia, 5.298], quoted in Longpré, col. 1772—though Merton reverses the
order of the first two divisions).
476. “All mystical theology consists in ecstatic love according to a triple
[hierarchical] way: purgative, illuminative and perfective” (Commentary on Luke,
13.21 [which reads “triplicem Viam hierarchicam”] [Opera Omnia, 7.349], quoted in
Longpré, col. 1773).
and of susceptio sponsi.477 “St Bonaventure est de tous les écrivains

spirituels celui qui a le plus inculqué aux âmes le désir des ascen-
sions mystiques et en a affirmé avec plus de force l’inéluctable
necessité” (Longpré, DS).478
De Reductione Artium ad Theologiam {emphasizes the} unity
of all science converging in mystical contemplation (see above).
Contemplations {involve} (a) {the} gift of understanding, {which
is} intellectual, speculative (per viam splendoris)—taught by Au-
gustine; (b) {the} gift of wisdom, {which is} sapiential, mystical
(per viam amoris)—taught by Denis.479
1. Intellectual Contemplation—Itinerarium Mentis in Deum (see
Late Medieval Mysticism—the best sections are translated in this
anthology).
#1. The Supreme Good is above us; {therefore} no one can
be happy unless he rises above himself and {this} cannot {be
done} by one’s own power—hence {the} necessity of prayer.480
#2. The ascent to God {takes place}:
a) extra nos: vestigia (sense; imagination)—symbolic
theology;
b) intra nos: imago (reason; intellect)—theology ut sic;
c) supra nos: God Himself (intelligence; apex mentis)—mysti-
cal theology.481
477. “union with the Spouse” (De Triplici Via, 3.1 [Opera Omnia, 8.12], quot-
ed in Longpré, col. 1810).
478. “St. Bonaventure is, of all spiritual writers, the one who has most
inspired in souls the desire for mystical ascents, and has affirmed with the most
force the absolute necessity for them” (Longpré, col. 1815).
479. “through the way of brightness”; “through the way of love” (Com-
mentary on Luke, 9.49 [Opera Omnia, 7.232], quoted in Longpré, col. 1819; for a
similar passage from the De Reductione, see above, page 148).
480. Itinerarium 1.1 (Late Medieval Mysticism, 132).
481. “outside ourselves: traces . . . within ourselves: the image . . . above
ourselves . . . the high point of the mind” (Itinerarium, 1.2 [Opera Omnia, 5.297];
the phrase “apex mentis” is not used here but is found in 1.6 [Opera Omnia,
5.297]).
These six powers {are}: in us by nature; deformed by sin; re-

formed by grace; purified by justice; exercised by knowledge;
made perfect by wisdom; all this {is} done by Christ (read #7,
Late Medieval Mysticism, p. 134482).
Contemplation (ch. VII)—{the} summit of contemplation {in-
corporates} (a) the Passion (#2); (b) reproducing the ecstasy of
Francis (#3); (c) {a} passive {stance} (#4):
If this transition, however, is to be genuine and perfect, then

must all labor on the part of the soul’s reasoning faculty
cease and the soul’s deep affection be centered in God and
transformed, as it were, into him. So mysterious and sub-
lime is this experience that none save he to whom it has
been given knows anything of it, that nobody receives ex-
cept he who desires it, and this desire comes to him only
whose being is inflamed by the fire of the Holy Spirit—sent
by Christ upon the earth. Hence it is that the “hidden
things” of God were revealed, as the apostle says, by the
Holy Ghost (Late Medieval Mysticism, p. 140);
482. “In his primitive constitution man was created by God capable of un-
troubled contemplation, and for that reason was placed by God in a ‘Garden of
delights.’ But, turning his back on the true light in order to pursue the mutable
good, he found himself, through his own fault, diminished and removed from
his pristine stature. With him the whole human race, through original sin, was
afflicted in a twofold manner: the human mind by ignorance and the human
body by concupiscence. As a result man, blinded and bent down, sits in dark-
ness and sees not the light of heaven, unless he be strengthened against concu-
piscence by grace with justice, and against ignorance by knowledge with wis-
dom. All this is done by Jesus Christ, ‘who of God is made unto us wisdom and
justice and sanctification and redemption.’ He, being the Power and Wisdom
of God, the incarnate Word full of grace and truth, is the Author of both grace
and truth. He it is who infuses the grace of charity which, when it comes ‘from a
pure heart, and a good conscience, and an unfeigned faith,’ is capable of order-
ing the whole soul according to the threefold aspect above mentioned. He also
taught the knowledge of truth according to the triple mode of theology: by sym-
bolic theology in which he teaches us how we might rightly use sensible things,
by theology properly so-called wherein we learn the use of things intelligible,
and by mystical theology through contact with which we may be raised aloft to
things unspeakable” (Late Medieval Mysticism, 134–35 [Opera Omnia, 5.298]).
#5 quotes Dionysius (read483); #6 {is} very important: grace not

study, {as well as the} active choice of silence rather than thought,
etc.
2. Sapiential Contemplation {involves the} perfect union of
love, {a} knowledge “per gustum et experientiam.”484 {It} culminates
in ecstasy of will—giving an immediate experience of God: “in
vertice est unitio amoris.”485 {In} ecstasy, the soul is united to God
outside its (ordinary) self, in apice mentis, not per modum visus et
intuitus, but per modum tactus et amplexus.486 Note the role of the
spiritual senses and {the} distinction between them. “Vis illius
unionis est immediate unitiva Deo super omnia ut quodam modo dor-
miat et vigilet.”487 {There is} a “death of love”: Iste amor est seques-
trativus, soporativus, sursumactivus. Sequestrat enim ab omni affectu
alio propter Sponsi affectum unicum. Soporat et quietat omnes poten-
tias et silentium imponit. Sursumagit quia ducit in Deum.488 In the
483. “O supereminent and transcendent Holy Trinity, inspiration of all

Christian philosophy, direct our steps to the unknown, sublime, and resplen-
dent heights of mystic utterances. On these heights are to be found the new,
the absolutely unquestionable and unchanging, mysteries of theology, hidden
away, as it were, in the obscurity of excessively lightsome darkness and illu-
minating silence. Here on these heights, so resplendent in their excessive light,
men are enlightened and spiritual souls are filled with the splendors of the true
good” (Mystical Theology, 1.1 [Late Medieval Mysticism, 140]).
484. “ad gustum et experimentalem cognitionem” (“by taste and experiential
realization”) (Commentary on the Sentences, III, d. 35, a. 1, q. 3, ad. 1, 2 [Opera
Omnia, 3.778], quoted in Longpré, col. 1825).
485. “at the height is the union of love” (Collations on the Six Days, 2.29
[Opera Omnia, 5.344], quoted in Longpré, col. 1828).
486. “at the high point of the spirit . . . by means of vision and intuition
. . . by means of touch and embrace” (Commentary on the Sentences, III, d. 14,
dub. 1 [Opera Omnia, 3.292], quoted in Longpré, col. 1829).
487. “The power of that union brings about oneness with God immedi-
ately, above all things, so that in a certain sense one sleeps and remains awake”
(Commentary on the Sentences, III, d. 27, a. 2, q. 1, ad. 6 [Opera Omnia, 3.604],
quoted in Longpré, col. 1830).
488. “This love has the power to separate, to put to sleep, to raise up. For
it separates from any other affection because of the unique love for the Spouse.
It puts to sleep and quiets all powers and imposes silence. It raises up because
sleep of the powers—{in} darkness—“Sola affectiva vigilat et silen-

tium omnibus aliis potentiis imponit.”489 “Oportet quod relinquantur
omnes intellectuales operationes.”490 ({There is a} controversy as to
how to interpret this: Longpré thinks491 it means just leaving be-
hind those intellectual operations which depend on sense. The total
emptiness of intellect is in rapture. Rapture {entails} immediate con-
tact with God without any thought at all . . . [??] {It is} an ex-
traordinary state like unto prophecy, {involving} direct revelation:
“Ultima pars vitae spiritualis in via.”492)
IX. Fourteenth-Century Mysticism

A. Lay Spiritual Movements:493 the thirteenth century contin-
ues trends begun by {the} Albigensians, etc. in the twelfth; for
instance: I Fedeli dell’Amore, {devotees of a} sophianic popular
mysticism related to erotic love trends in secular literature; {the}
Brethren of {the} Free Spirit, {practitioners of} Flemish popular
mysticism {in a} secret society; Brothers of the Apostles, {who were}
violently opposed to the Church of Rome ({their} founders {were}
burned); Lay Penitents, {who were dedicated} to repair outrages
of Albigensians on {the} Blessed Sacrament, etc.; Humiliati, {who
were} pacifists—some remain in the Church, some break away.
N.B. new orders: active orders like {the} Crosiers {and} Trinitarians,
{were formed} to meet new needs among {the} laity, {the} sick,
it leads into God” (Collations on the Six Days, 2.31 [Opera Omnia, 5.341], quoted
in Longpré, col. 1834).
489. “Only the affections remain awake, and impose silence on all other
powers” (Collations on the Six Days, 2.31 [Opera Omnia, 5.341], quoted in Longpré,
col. 1834).
490. “One must leave behind all operations of the intellect” (Itinerarium,
7.4 [Opera Omnia, 5.312], quoted in Longpré, col. 1835).
491. Longpré, col. 1838.
492. “The ultimate part of the spiritual life here on earth” (Collations on the
Six Days, 23.10 [Opera Omnia, 5.455-56], quoted in Longpré, col. 1840).
captives etc.; confraternities {developed, which were} leading a

marginal life outside parish and liturgy, but {were} important.
B. The “Frauenbewegung”:494 {note} the importance of an ide-
ology centered on “the lady”: idealization of the lady in chival-
rous literature, {reflecting the} dignity of woman; {the} cult of the
Blessed Virgin; the growth of a new society {which was more}
commercial, in which woman is less an object of conquest and
possession by the strong warrior, {and} exists in her own right.
Vernacular literature and piety give scope for expression of femi-
nine experience: women ({who} ordinarily didn’t know Latin)
could now express themselves. {There is an} influence of this on
the development towards bridal mysticism. Love, mercy, suffer-
ing take on greater importance, as opposed to ascetic aggressiv-
ity; the passive virtues {are} emphasized. Yet some of the women
saints were tremendously strong and active, v.g. Catherine of
Siena.
It was a moment in history in which woman, mother of

renewals and of dawns, drew forth from the sacred depths
of her being a fresh inspiration for the civilizations of the
letter and of iron. In the spiritual order, at such a time, in
their simplicity, protected by a precious ignorance, more
patient and also more prompt in sacrifice, they give the
religious life a new impetus. Hence we see the Béguines
create a new language to translate their passionate experi-
ences, seek God in a more immediate and total union, and
proclaim as it were an interior gospel of a new demand on
the part of eternal love (Dom J. B. Porion, in his introduc-
tion to Hadewijch d’Anvers).495
The Béguines and Beghards496 began at {the} end of {the} twelfth

century {and} prepare {the} way for fourteenth-century mysti-
cism. Originally {they were} grouped around a chapel or church
494. “the women’s movement.”

495. Porion, 11.
496. See Histoire de Spiritualité, vol. 2, 425-30; ET: 353–57.
served by mendicant {religious in} response to {the} Franciscan

call to popular devotion and mysticism. {They lived} without
vows, {but with a} promise of chastity during residence. {They
led a} simple community life, with manual labor—spinning,
weaving, {and practiced} simple, personal, individualistic devo-
tions to Jesus and Mary. Reclusion {was} encouraged; ecstatic
piety {was characteristic}; {the movements were} very rich in
spirituality. But one of the drawbacks of the Béguinages and their
popular mysticism was the fact that these uninstructed people,
left to themselves, often deviated into queer bypaths of pseudo-
mysticism, or at least expressed themselves in terms which in-
vited condemnation. The errors of the Béguines and Beghards
(men) condemned by {the Council of} Vienne in 1311–1312 (Denz-
inger, 471 ff.497) are mostly pre-quietist, due obviously to misun-
derstandings by simple minds and exaggerations: that the perfect
could become impeccable, and that they did not need to exercise
themselves in virtue, obey the precepts of the Church or superi-
ors, pay external reverence to the Blessed Sacrament, or even
guard themselves against certain impure acts. With all this, one
could attain to perfect beatitude by contemplation in the present
life. Note, however, in the majority of cases, with wise direction,
these errors were avoided. These errors will be met with again
and again and will continue to develop throughout the late
Middle Ages and into modern times. We shall see them culminate
in Molinos. At the same time, note the Béguines were sometimes
judged with extreme harshness. Marguerite Porete was burnt at
the stake in 1310 principally for some propositions which were
later taught by saints and have now become quite ordinarily ac-
cepted. One of these {is} that the perfect soul does not care for
the consolations of God but occupies herself with Him directly.
A book, evidently hers, and containing the censored prepositions,
is in print today and accepted without question—The Mirror of
497. Henricus Denzinger and Carolus Rahner, eds., Enchiridion Symbolo-

rum Definitionum et Declarationum de Rebus Fidei et Morum, 31st ed. (Rome: Herd-
er, 1957), 220–21 (nn. 471–78).
Simple Souls. Note: there are also pontifical documents in favor of

the Béguines.498 There was a certain overemphasis on the marvelous
and miraculous, v.g. in the life of St. Christine.499 Undoubtedly the
levitation ascribed to the Béguines contributed to the great craze
about witches in the fourteenth-fifteenth centuries. Note the fear
which was aroused on all sides by these thousands of women
living strange mystical lives.
Summary: we must not exaggerate the defects of the Béguines
and Beghards. Certainly there were grave dangers and abuses,
but the fact is that there were even greater benefits for those
thousands of devout souls who were not able to live in convents
and who thus had a life of prayer and simplicity opened to them,
and attained sanctity. {Note the} importance for us: the Flemish
Béguinages were important centers of early lay mysticism; the
movement that sprang up in them, and the need for directors,
led to the whole flowering of mysticism in the Rhineland and
Netherlands in the fourteenth century. {We must recognize the}
great significance of the dialogue between theologians and mys-
tics in the Béguinages and convents of {the} Low Countries and
Germany!
The Cistercian Nuns:500 the mystics of the Cistercian nunneries
of the thirteenth century are very closely related to the Béguines,
and help them in preparing the way for fourteenth-century mysti-
cism. St. Lutgarde is an example, {along with} the three Idas,
Blessed Alice, etc. Most especially Blessed Beatrice of Nazareth is
important for her mystical autobiography, written in the ver-
nacular, one of the first of its kind (see Vie Spirituelle, Supplément,
498. See Porion, 14, referring to J. de Guibert, Documenta Ecclesiastica Chris-

tianae Perfectionis: Studium Spectantia (Rome: Gregorian University, 1931), nn.
279, 281, 282.
499. There were actually two Christines, of Belgium and of Stommeln
(near Cologne), both known as “Mirabilis” for their miraculous powers (see Po-
rion, 14 and 15, n. 14).
{1929}501). Beatrice had been formed by Béguines before becoming

a Cistercian, as {were} also Ida of Louvain, Blessed Mechtilde of
Magdeburg, etc. (Mechtilde was a Béguine).
Hadewijch of Antwerp:502 little is known of her, but she is gen-
erally agreed to be a thirteenth-century Béguine—or rather there
are two authors of the series of poems attributed to Hadewijch,
including a “deutero-Hadewijch” responsible for the more Eck-
hartian poems (Wesenmystik), while the other was more a “bridal
mystic” (Brautmystik). They were evidently influenced by the
Cistercians, especially Bernard and William of St. Thierry, and
also of course by St. Augustine. On the other hand, she (they)
is prior to Eckhart. The poems of the Second Hadewijch seem
so much like Eckhart that some have thought they follow his
teaching. On the contrary, quite probably they anticipate it.503
Ruysbroeck was inspired by the poems of {the} Second
Hadewijch.504
Special Traits of Popular Mysticism of the Béguines, as exemplified
in Hadewijch:
1. {There is an} ardent quest for union with God without me-
dium of signs, words and reasoning, and even “beyond virtues.”505
A German poet of the thirteenth century sums up in verse the
501. La Vie Spirituelle, Supplément, 19 (1929), 320–32; French translation

by J. Kerssemakers. This is actually not her autobiography but a short treatise,
“The Seven Degrees of Love,” which corresponds to a chapter in the Vita of
Beatrice attributed to William of Afflighem, based on notes written by Beatrice
(see Histoire de Spiritualité, vol. 2, 432; ET: 359, which erroneously gives the date
as 1939, followed by Merton).
502. See Histoire de Spiritualité, vol. 2, 434–38; ET: 361–64, and Porion, passim.
503. See Porion, 47–51.
504. See Porion, 46–47.
505. See the words of the twelfth Béguine in Ruysbroeck’s Book of the
Twelve Béguines: “To practice virtue in all loyalty—and beyond the virtues, to
contemplate God—there truly is what I value” (quoted in Porion, 172, n. 1). See
also Porion’s comments on the condemned proposition from Marguerite Porete
about “taking leave of the virtues,” properly understood as “practicing the vir-
tues without being concerned with them” (12, n. 5), and the similar perspective
in Jacopone da Todi’s Lauda 60 (50, n. 65).
spirituality of the Béguines: Sein selbst und aller Dinge frei /

Ohn Mittel sehen, was Gott sei!506
2. Personal distinction tends to vanish in union. (This was
{a} dangerous doctrine and brought trouble to Eckhart.) This is
properly understood when we see it in the context of total self-
sacrifice out of love, sharing in the poverty and self-emptying of
the Word Incarnate. Also it is inseparable from {a} profound eu-
charistic devotion in Hadewijch and in many saintly Béguines. It
is communion that leads to “union without difference.”507 {There
are} two levels of mystical rapture: (a) to be ravished in spirit; (b) to
be ravished out of the spirit.508
3. {There is} emphasis on interior passivity and freedom—
without neglect of duties of {one’s} state. (But some expressions
of this tended to suggest contempt for ordinary virtues—hence
needed qualification.) Hadewijch {was} always clear—{she was}
for virtue.
4. {There is} absolute intellectual simplicity, without reflec-
tion, “without why”—the theme goes back to the Cistercian mys-
tic Beatrice of Nazareth and ultimately to St. Bernard.509
5. {There is a} purity of love {that is} forgetful of personal
advantage, {a} total self-sacrifice; Mary is the model of pure love.
6. In Hadewijch there is also an ardent apostolic love for souls
and great burning concern for the salvation of sinners; but purity
of love demands that the soul refrain from works, since pure love
is itself the highest of all works. Read here the classic statement
of St. John of the Cross:
Here it is to be noted that, for so long as the soul has not

reached this estate of union of love, it must needs practise
506. “Free of themselves and of all things, / To see without medium what
God is” (Lamprecht von Regensburg, Die Tochter Sione, quoted in Porion, 49, n.
61).
507. Hadewijch, Vision 7, quoted in Porion, 32.
508. Porion, 33, following Joseph Maréchal, sj, Études sur la Psychologie des
Mystiques, 2 vols. (Paris: Desclée de Brouwer, 1937), 2.286.
509. See Porion, 49–50, 147, n. 6.
love, both in the active life and in the contemplative; but when
it reaches that estate it befits it not to be occupied in other
outward acts and exercises which might keep it back, how-
ever little, from that abiding in love with God, although they
may greatly conduce to the service of God; for a very little
of this pure love is more precious, in the sight of God and the
soul, and of greater profit to the Church, even though the
soul appear to be doing nothing, than are all these works
together. For this reason Mary Magdalene, although she
wrought great good with her preaching, and would have
continued to do so, because of the great desire that she had
to please her Spouse and to profit the Church, hid herself
in the desert for thirty years in order to surrender herself
truly to this love, since it seemed to her that in every way
she would gain much more by so doing, because of the
great profit and importance that there is to the Church in a
very little of this love.
Therefore if any soul should have aught of this degree of
solitary love, great wrong would be done to it, and to the
Church, if, even but for a brief space, one should endeavor
to busy it in active or outward affairs, of however great
moment; for, since God adjures the creatures not to awak-
en the soul from this love, who shall dare to do so and
shall not be rebuked? After all, it was for the goal of this love
that we were created. Let those, then, that are great actives,
that think to girdle the world with their outward works
and their preachings, take note here that they would bring
far more profit to the Church and be far more pleasing to
God (apart from the good example which they would give
of themselves) if they spent even half this time in abid-
ing with God in prayer, even had they not reached such
a height as this. Of a surety they would accomplish more
with one piece of work than they now do with a thousand,
and that with less labour, since their prayer would be of
such great deserving and they would have won such spiri-
tual strength by it. For to act otherwise is to hammer vigor-
ously and to accomplish little more than nothing, at times
nothing at all; at times, indeed, it may even be to {do harm.
May God forbid that your salt should begin to} lose its
savour; and yet although in such a case it may seem super-

ficially that it has some effect, it will have no substantial
effect, for it is certain that good works cannot be done save in
the strength of God (both quotations from Spiritual Canticle,
Peers translation, p. 346-7).510
These were difficult truths to explain in acceptable terms,

and those who misunderstood them went very far into error. The
Rhenish speculative mystics and Ruysbroeck were in large mea-
sure attempting to justify and clarify the immense, hidden, inar-
ticulate movement of the spirit that had taken place among the
Béguines with so many good and bad effects. The problem was
to channel this spiritual power, not let it run riot.
From the poems of Hadewijch (written in the popular style of
troubadour love-poetry):
I must leave my inheritance, and on the highroads

Walk alone, wherever free love bids me go (II).511
He who takes the road of love
Let him give himself faithfully
To every good work.
For Love’s honor alone
Let him serve and all his life
Prize his sublime choice.
From Love Himself he shall receive
All the strength that is lacking to him
And the fruit of his desires.
For love can never refuse Himself
To whoever loves Him
510. Annotation (2-3) for Stanza XXIX (line dropped by eyeskip in mim-
eograph) (Peers, vol. 2).
511. Porion, 64 (ll. 17–18) (the poem numbers are taken from Porion’s se-
lection, which do not correspond to the critical edition).
He gives more than we expect

And more than He made us hope (IV).512
This is the theme of risking all for love, abandonment and going
forth one knows not where or how, trusting in His fidelity. (Note:
she does not discard good works.) {For the themes of} prayer and
insistent desire for love, compare St. Thérèse of Lisieux.513
Ah! I have no longer any way of living

Love, you know it well!
I have kept nothing that is my own
Give me what is thine!
But alas, even if you give me much
I will still hunger, for I want all (IV).514
Another Carmelite theme:
At the high-point of the spirit,

Of this I am certain
Love must pay love with love (VII).515
512. Porion, 70–71 (ll. 13–24).

513. See St. Thérèse of Lisieux, Story of a Soul, c. 8: “And now I have no
other desire except to love Jesus into folly. . . . Neither do I desire any longer
suffering or death, and still I love them both; it is love alone that attracts me,
however. . . . Now, abandonment alone guides me”; c. 9: “The science of Love,
ah, yes, this word resounds sweetly in the ear of my soul, and I desire only this
science. . . . I understand so well that it is only love which makes us acceptable
to God that this love is the only good I ambition”; c. 11: “A scholar has said: ‘Give
me a lever and a fulcrum and I will lift the world.’ What Archimedes was not able
to obtain, for his request was not directed by God and was only made from a
material viewpoint, the saints have obtained in all its fullness. The Almighty has
given them as fulcrum: HIMSELF ALONE; as lever: PRAYER which burns with
a fire of love. And it is in this way that they have lifted the world” (Story of a Soul:
The Autobiography of St. Thérèse of Lisieux, trans. John Clarke, ocd [Washington,
DC: Institute of Carmelite Studies, 1976], 178, 187–88, 258).
514. Porion, 72 (ll. 67–72).
515. Porion, 83 (ll. 68–70).
{There are} frequent complaints at the dolors of love, longing for

death, etc., complaints at having been deceived by Love. This is a
Cistercian theme (cf. vicissitudo 516 and languor animae amantis517).
Know well, there are more sorrows in love
Than there are lights in the starry heavens (VIII).518
Before the all is united to the All
Many a bitter draught must be tasted (VIII).519
How the All is seized by the all
This will never be known by strangers (VIII).520
(Love is a hell.)
If a man will face this truth let him beware
For in the presence of love nothing will serve
Except to receive at every moment blows or caresses
Striking even to the center of the faithful heart (XIX).521
The “Second” Hadewijch:522 here we have not complaints at the

sufferings and aridities of love abandoned by the Beloved, but
praise of naked and essential knowledge in the abyss of luminous
darkness, “without modes.”523
516. “alternation”: see St. Bernard, In Cantica, 31.1 (PL 183, col. 940C), 32.2
(PL 183, col. 946C); the expression is also found in Guerric of Igny, In Festo Bene-
dicti, Sermo 4.5 (PL 185, col. 115B) and in Gilbert of Hoyland, In Cantica 25.5,
27.7, 30.1, 31.2 (PL 184, cols. 133A, 144D, 155B, 161B); see Gilson, 241, n. 215, for
a discussion of this term in Bernard.
517. “the languor of the loving soul” (William of St. Thierry, Expositio in
Epistolam ad Romanos, 5.9, which reads: “Languor est . . . ” [PL 180, col. 645A]);
cf. Song of Songs 2:5: “quia amore langueo” (“Because I languish for love”).
518. Porion, 85 (ll. 17–18).
519. Porion, 87 (ll. 77–78).
520. Porion, 87 (ll. 81–82).
521. Porion, 128 (ll. 206–209).
522. For distinctions in style and focus, see Porion, 45–56.
523. A term perhaps most familiar from the conclusion of Ruysbroeck’s
Adornment of the Spiritual Marriage (“. . . a nakedness where all the divine
names, aspects, living reasons which are reflected in the mirror of the divine
She is alone in an eternity without shores

Herself limitless, saved by the Unity that swallows her up,
The intelligence, with desires at rest
Vowed to total loss in the totality of the Immense One:
There a simple truth is revealed to her
A truth that cannot but be simple: the pure and naked
Nothing (I).524
In the intimacy of the One these souls are pure and naked
interiorly
Without images, without figures
So though liberated from time, uncreated
[cf. condemned proposition of Eckhart525]
Freed from all limits in the silent vastness (I).526
The noble light shows itself in whatever way it pleases
It is of no avail to seek, or to intend, or to reason:
These must be banished. One must remain within
In a naked silence, pure and without will:
In this way one receives
The nobility which no human tongue can express
And the knowledge that springs forth ever new from its
untouched source (II).527
. . . penetrate into the bareness of the One
Above understanding
truth, fall in a simplicity beyond name, beyond reasons, beyond modes” [Po-
rion, 161, n. 1]), but which is found throughout the work of the thirteenth- and
fourteenth-century Flemish and Rhenish mystics (see also Porion, 17, 21, 34, 45,
136 [n.1], 146 [n. 3], 147 [n. 5], 156 [n. 1]).
524. Porion, 134 (ll. 13–18).
525. Denzinger and Rahner, 229 (n. 527): “Aliquid est in anima, quod est in-
creatum et increabile; si tota anima esset talis, esset increata et increabilis, et hoc est
intellectus” (“There is something in the soul that is uncreated and uncreatable;
if the entire soul were such, it would be uncreated and uncreatable, and this is
the intellect”).
526. Porion, 134–35 (ll. 33–36).
527. Porion, 140 (ll. 15–20).
Where all help of light fails us

Where desires meet with nothing but darkness
A noble something, which I know not,
Which is neither “this” nor “that”
Guides us and leads us and absorbs us in our Origin (II).528
“Without why”:
The multitude of reasons beyond number
Which make me prefer you, Lord, to all things
Escapes me when I turn in nakedness to you alone
Loving you without why, loving yourself for yourself (II).529
{She is} evidently influenced by the great theme of St. Bernard:
Amo, quia amo.530 Note the place of Christ crucified in this “un-
knowing” Love:
It is in the wounds of Christ that one acquires nobility
And loses all knowledge (II).531
Note also, there is great emphasis on the practice of every virtue,
especially meekness, patience, humility, mercy, gentleness, char-
ity. Here we see the mysticism of a saintly Béguine at its best.
In the popular mysticism of the Béguines, etc. we must re-
member the tendency to more and more extraordinary manifes-
tations (though this is contrary to what we see above in Hadewijch).
Ecstatic piety is common—visions, revelations, sensible manifes-
tations of spiritual realities—in spite of the insistence of the spir-
ituality against this—levitation, stigmatization, etc. The powerful
movement of popular mysticism attracted the attention of the In-
quisition, as we have seen above. The Béguines were not only
condemned for doctrinal errors but their mysticism tended to be
suspect, and it was not unusual for a “mystic” to be condemned
to death for some strange manifestations that had attracted notice.
528. Porion, 140–41 (ll. 32–36).

529. Porion, 141 (ll. 51–54).
530. “I love because I love” (In Cantica, 83.4 [PL 183, col. 1183B]).
531. Porion, 143 (l. 87).
Some people found it hard to draw the line between Béguines,

heretical sects, “witches” and so on. There was great confusion:
boundary lines were not sharply drawn and many crossed over
the boundaries without knowing they had done so.
The Women Saints of the Late Middle Ages: not only did a vastly
popular mystical movement exist, but in the late Middle Ages we
see the greatest saints are not the men and not even women in
convents, but women of the laity. This is a matter of great signifi-
cance. The place occupied in the twelfth century by St. Bernard,
in the thirteenth by Sts. Francis and Dominic, is occupied in the
fourteenth by St. Catherine of Siena, St. Bridget of Sweden, sur-
rounded by many others of lesser stature. Catherine of Siena, a
layperson, {a} Dominican Tertiary, assumes the role of visionary
monitor of the popes that had been exercised by St. Bridget of
Sweden when the latter died in 1373. The fact that Bridget and
Catherine were women only emphasized the surprising power of
their supernatural gifts, and helped them to be accepted by the
popes as friends and instruments of God. A few notes {are in order}
on Catherine of Siena as a woman with a special and prophetic
vocation in the medieval Church. There is no question that she
was raised up by God for her charismatic role. This brought home
to all the fact that heaven was using special means to warn men, in
a time of crisis when the voice of God had repeatedly been ignored.
She had first of all a clear sense of her mission. This was supported
by a perfectly orthodox mysticism which could not be doubted. She
was taught directly by Christ, through the Holy Spirit. She served
as His instrument for the good of the Church. At the heart of her
mysticism is a burning love for and devotion to the Church and
the papacy. Her mission was sealed by a complete mutual giving
between herself and Christ. Although a Dominican in spirituality,
she nevertheless stands above all schools and movements. She is
a spiritual phenomenon in herself. Her spirituality and mysticism
correspond entirely to the needs of her mission. “I am He who is;
thou art she who is not.”532 {Note} her sense of her own nothing-
532. See Histoire de Spiritualité, vol. 2, 494, 497; ET: 412, 415.
ness and {her} complete abandonment to the action of Christ. Total

humility is the guarantee of her efficacy as an instrument in society,
and this humility was recognized and respected. It was the “sign”
of Christ. {Her} burning love for Christ and for souls {reveals a}
perfect likeness to Christ in love for all. The central idea in the mysti-
cism of Catherine of Siena is not speculation about various forms
of union, not inquisitive examination of how union takes place, or
how to ascend to higher degrees of love and fruition: it is rather
total self-sacrifice for the Church, concern for the purity
and perfection of the Church rather than her own, {a} love
for sinners and desire for their redemption. The fact that she
was a laywoman is not secondary but absolutely primary: it
stresses the relative unimportance of belonging to this or that order and
the supreme importance of union with Christ Crucified for the
redemption of sinners.
The full import of Catherine’s charismatic mission is to be
seen only when we realize the background. Catherine dies in
1380. At this time there is a great sense of disillusionment with
clergy, hierarchy and with the religious orders. The corruption
of the clergy has finally brought the laity to lose confidence in
the priests and even in the Church. Wyclif at the time of Cathe-
rine’s greatest activity is preaching that only the holy belong to
the Church, which is “purely invisible.” He is also denying tran-
substantiation and the value of the sacrament of orders. At the
same time the more or less heterodox mystics, or those on the
margin of the Church’s life, are tending more and more to ignore
the Church, her discipline, her worship, her hierarchy, etc. Even
the orthodox mystics tend to abstract from the problems and
scandals of the visible life of the Church.
{In the} fifteenth century, most of the saints are women.533 St.
Frances of Rome {is} a mystic who is also a wife and a mother. St.
533. Histoire de Spiritualité, vol. 2, 595–98, 601; ET: 500–502, 505, for all these
women except St. Lidwyne (of Schiedam), who is mentioned by Porion (26, n.
27) as coming into conflict with a priest who refused to consider a host, which
descended from heaven into the young woman’s hands, to be consecrated.
Catherine of Genoa {was} married; her married life {was} a hell.

{She is known for her} care of {the} poor and sick, {and her} vi-
sions of Purgatory, {which} anticipate {the} Dark Night {of} St.
John. St. Lidwyne {was a} visionary {marked by} suffering, a Bé-
guine {who had to} struggle with {the} clergy concerning her
experiences. St. Joan of Arc {had} one of the most extraordinary
charismatic missions of all time. {She was} executed May 30, 1431.
The “irresistible” prophetic call {came to her} outside of all fa-
miliar religious forms, and orders. Her sanctity {consists} in her
fidelity to the extraordinary call she received from God. She can-
not be regarded strictly as a martyr, and her visions as such do
not constitute her sanctity. (Note: in a contemporary document
Joan of Arc is called, no doubt loosely, a Béguine.534)
B{1}. The German Mystics of the Fourteenth Century

Background – Summary:
1. {Note} the popular widespread movement of mysticism
outside the cloister, among Béguines, among unattached groups
of lay people, among heterodox groups. This movement tends
to be independent of the clergy. The use of the vernacular is of very
special importance.
2. However note that the mendicant orders, particularly the
Dominicans, encourage and guide the movement. They provide
theologians and directors and preachers. The theologians and
preachers learn from the unlettered mystics they guide, and dis-
seminate the doctrine thus learned. They are in many cases mys-
tics themselves, but their mysticism undoubtedly owes a great
deal to their penitents.
3. Note the emphasis on poverty—crucial since the twelfth
century and {the} mendicant movement. This question is vital;
but the emphasis is now on interior poverty above all, and the
stripping of self, “annihilation,” so that God can give Himself di-
rectly and immediately, without impediment.
534. The Chronique de Morosini (1429), cited in Porion, 26, n. 27.

4. There is a tendency to be autobiographical, and to share

one’s mystical experience with others; see for instance Suso’s
Autobiography.
Forerunners: besides the Béguines and especially Beatrice of
Nazareth and Hadewijch, already mentioned, {these include}: St.
Hildegarde of Bingen, {the} twelfth-century visionary “officially”
approved by St. Bernard and Eugene III: she foretold {the} coming
of Protestantism (?) {and made} apocalyptic prophecies; Mechtilde
of Magdeburg, {who was} first a Béguine, directed by {a} Domini-
can, Henry of Halle, {and} later a Cistercian at Helfta, in her last
years; her book of visions, Flowing Light of the Godhead, {is} remark-
able for her genius as {a} poet. {The} key to her spirituality {is}
immediacy, hence poverty: “Nothing must subsist between me
and Thee—put aside all fear, all shame, and all [undue confidence
in] exterior virtues”;535 St. Albert the Great, himself a mystic and
great magister of theology at Cologne, prepared the way for the
Dominican mystics who grew up under his influence; he was one
of the great Dionysians of the thirteenth century.
Movements:
1. In the center {is} the Rhenish school of mystical (specula-
tive) theologians and preachers: Eckhart, Tauler, Suso and mem-
bers of other mendicant orders besides the Dominicans.
2. The Flemish mystics, centered around Ruysbroeck, whom
we include here with the Rhenish mystics, due to lack of time.
3. The Friends of God: due to {the} Black Death and other trag-
edies of {the} time {they emphasize} fear of {the} wrath of God, but
not stopping at fear they see {that the} only solution lies in being
the “Friend of God,” loving Him for His own sake alone. {They
show the} influence of St. Bernard’s distinction {of} slaves, merce-
naries, friends.536 Mechtilde of Magdeburg speaks of the mystic as
535. Histoire de Spiritualité, vol. 2, 451–52; ET: 376–77.

536. De Diligendo Deo, 12–14 ([PL 182, cols. 995B–998B]; the progression
is also found in Conference 11 of Cassian [PL 49, col. 853A] and elsewhere in
patristic writing).
the “close friend of God.”537 St. Bernard {was} remembered in {the}

Rhineland as a holy man and “friend of God.”538 Hence, {for this}
popular movement of mysticism, {the goal was} to become a friend
of God, in Suso’s term, as one who has completely abandoned his own
will. {See} Suso on “the higher school of Gelassenheit”:
Once after Matins, the Servant sat in his chair, and as he

meditated he fell into a trance. It seemed to his inner eye
that a noble youth came down toward him, and stood be-
fore him saying: “Thou hast been long enough in the lower
school and hast exercised thyself long enough in it; thou
hast become mature. Come with me now! I will take thee
to the highest school that exists in the world. There thou
shalt learn diligently the highest knowledge, which will
lead thee to divine peace and bring thy holy beginning to
a blessed fulfillment.” Thereat he was glad and he arose.
The youth took him by the hand and led him, as it seemed
to him, to a spiritual land. There was an extremely beauti-
ful house there and it looked as if it was the residence of
monks. Those who lived there were concerned with the
higher knowledge. When he entered he was kindly re-
ceived and affectionately welcomed by them. They has-
tened to their master and told him that someone had come
who also wished to be his disciple, and to learn their knowl-
edge. He said, “First I will see him with my own eyes, to
see if he pleases me.” On seeing him, he smiled at him very
kindly and said, “Know from me that this guest is quite
capable of becoming a worthy master of our high learn-
ing, if he will only patiently submit to living in the narrow
cage in which he must be confined.” The Servant turned to
the youth who had brought him there and asked, “Ah, my
dear friend, tell me, what is this highest school and what
is this learning thou hast spoken of?” The youth replied:
“The high school and the knowledge which is taught here
is nothing but the complete, entire abandonment of one’s
537. Chiquot, col. 494; see Flowing Light of the Godhead, 1.22, 44, 3.10, 6.1, 7.31.
538. Chiquot, col. 493.
self, that is to say, that a man must persist in self-abnega-

tion, however God acts toward him, by Himself or by His
creatures. He is to strive at all times, in joy and in sorrow,
to remain constant in giving up what is his own, as far as
human frailty permits, considering only God’s praise and
honor, just as the dear Christ did to his Heavenly Father”
(Suso: The Life of the Servant: “The Higher School of Gelas-
senheit,” quoted in Late Medieval Mysticism, pp. 259-60).539
The movement was to some extent secret and esoteric, not

exactly anti-clerical but outside the normal sphere of clerical in-
fluence. Priests belonged to it and gave direction. It was not anti-
sacramental, but definitely aimed at a democratic atmosphere in
which priest and people were not separated by a wide gap. Mem-
bers included a priest, Henry of Nordlingen, Rulman Merswin,
{the} anonymous author of {the} Book of the Poor in Spirit, lords
and nobles as well as many humble people. Tauler and Eckhart
were included as “Friends of God.” The Theologia Germanica
(Theologia Deutsch) is a product of this school. It calls attention to
{the} distinction between true and false friends of God.540 {It em-
phasizes} a call to deification (Vergottung) by a perfect following
of Christ above and beyond both action and contemplation (see
below541). The Rhenish mystics seek above all a synthesis in
Christ, born in the soul, liberating the contemplative from all
limited forms, so that he is equally free and united to God in
suffering or joy, action or contemplation, etc., because “happiness
lies not in what is done by the creature but in what is done by
God.”542
539. Life of the Servant, chapter 19 (“Gelassenheit”: “abandonment”).

541. Page 212.
542. Theologia Germanica, c. 9 (this and later quotations from the Theolo-
gia Germanica do not correspond to either of the available English translations:
Theologia Germanica, trans. Susanna Winkworth [New York: Pantheon, 1949];
Theologia Germanica: The Way to a Sinless Life, trans. Thomas Kepler [Cleveland:
World Publishing, 1952]).
Mysticism of Eckhart and {the} German School: Eckhart (1260-

1327) {was} prior and vicar in his order, {the} Dominicans; a highly
respected theologian, preacher {and} director, {he} taught as ma-
gister in Paris, Strasbourg and Cologne. His sermons were tran-
scribed by nuns to whom he preached—Dominicans, Benedictines,
Cistercians, etc. Although Eckhart is not the mystic of the German
school we most recommend for reading in the monastery (on the
contrary he is to be read only with great caution), he is nevertheless
the one representative of the school who is most extensively studied
today, especially by non-Catholics. Dr. Suzuki, the Zen Buddhist,
seems to derive most of his knowledge of Christian mysticism
from Eckhart, to whom he is greatly sympathetic.543 Several studies
and anthologies of Eckhart (by Protestants) have recently appeared
in English.544 No translation of Tauler is yet available.545 Only a few
texts of Suso and Ruysbroeck are to be had in English. Hence those
in the monastery who meet non-Catholics or specialists in these
fields need to be at least aware of Eckhart’s existence and of what
the Church thinks about him. He is perhaps not the greatest mystic
of the Rhenish school. He is above all a brilliant mind, a genius in
speculative theology, but one who was not careful to moderate his
language by prudent discretion.
543. See D. T. Suzuki, Mysticism: Christian and Buddhist (New York: Harper,
1957).
544. See Raymond Blakney, trans., Meister Eckhart: A Modern Translation
(New York: Harper, 1941); James M. Clark, The Great German Mystics: Eckhart,
Tauler and Suso (Oxford: Blackwell, 1949); James M. Clark, Meister Eckhart: An
Introduction to the Study of his Works, with an Anthology of his Sermons (New
York: Nelson, 1957); James M. Clark, trans., Meister Eckhart: Sselected Treatises
and Sermons Translated from Latin and German (London: Faber and Faber, 1958); a
Catholic perspective from this period is provided by Jeanne Ancelet-Hustache,
Master Eckhart and the Rhineland Mystics, trans. Hilda Graef (New York: Harper
Torchbook, 1957).
545. In fact an English translation of Tauler appeared during this very
year: see John Tauler, Spiritual Conferences, trans. Eric Colledge and Sr. M. Jane
(St. Louis: Herder, 1961); Merton mentions this translation in a January 29, 1962
letter to Etta Gullick (Hidden Ground of Love, 350).
Doctrines:
1) Exemplarism: underlying Eckhart’s mystical teaching is
the idea of the destiny of all creatures to return to find themselves
in the Word in Whom alone they have their true being. Return to
the exemplar {is a return} to the “eternal luminous image of one-
self in the Son of God beyond every sensible image, every sign
and every concept.”546 This was propounded by St. Albert the
Great following Scotus Erigena and the neo-Platonists.
2) Immediacy: God as Creator is immediately present to every
being which He maintains in existence. Their being is not outside
Him in the void, but it is distinct from His Being. He alone is; all
that He creates is, outside of Him, pure nothingness. But it is in
Him, apart from Him. In man, this immediacy is also on the level
of grace, above nature, for the Son of God is born in the center of the
soul that is in grace, and thus, intimately united with the one Son
of God, we become, with Him, “one Son of God.”547 Hence we
are divinized in proportion as we are stripped of all that is not the
Son of God born in us, in the center of our soul. This is done by
the action of the Holy Spirit, taking the scintilla animae and restor-
ing it to its original source in the Word. Vünkelin—the scintilla or
spark of the soul—is a light in the center of the soul, above all
the faculties, “always opposed to what is not God,”548 but buried,
so to speak, under the ashes of our selfish preoccupation and
self-will. Grund—what is the relation of the “spark” to the
“ground” of the soul? The ground is the naked, nameless, solitary
essence of the soul flowing directly from God without medium. It
is also treated as the uncreated grace of God, i.e. God Himself
present to the soul, born in the soul as Son. {This is} a very deep
and difficult concept. Most of Eckhart’s troubles {are} due to the
confusions in explanation of what constituted the immediate
546. Raphael-Louis Oechslin, “Eckhart,” DS 4, cols. 99–100.

547. Sermon 6 and Book of Divine Consolation, quoted in Raphael-Louis
Oechslin, “Divinisation: IV. Moyen Age: C. École Rhénane et Flamande: 1. Selon
Eckhart,” DS 3, cols. 1433, 1435.
548. Sermon 22a, quoted in Oechslin, “Eckhart,” col. 101.
union of the soul with God in the “ground” or essence. “Deus

illabitur ipsi nudae essentiae animae quae ipsa nomen proprium non
habet et altior est quam intellectus et voluntas” (Eckhart).549
3) The Return to God: the Word being born in the ground of
the soul, it is necessary to return to Him by stripping off every-
thing that is exterior to the inmost depth in the soul. Here we
come to propositions that got Eckhart into difficulty regarding
asceticism:
a) Active level: there is no problem about the active part of
the return to God, by ordinary works, virtues, sacramental life,
etc.
b) “Noble” level: but Eckhart insists that perfect union with
God is attained only on the level of the “noble” man, the interior
man who is one with God “above all works and virtues.”550 Here
we find the matter of several condemned propositions which
seem to say that all practice of virtue is useless, that sin is not to
be regretted and that one can be completely stripped of all that
is not divine. These propositions as condemned are not seen in
their context but purely and simply as they stand. Eckhart says
that we must be stripped even of images of the humanity of
Christ. “Strip yourself of all images and unite yourself with the
essence without image and without form.”551 “When the soul
leaves all forms it goes direct to the formless nature of God.”552
“When thou art completely stripped of thyself and of all that is
549. “God will flow into the naked essence of the soul which does not have
its own name, and which is higher than the intellect and the will” (quoted in
Oechslin, “Eckhart,” col. 102).
550. In his brief treatise “The Aristocrat” (or “The Nobleman”) Eckhart
writes: “St. Augustine says that when the human soul is fully devoted to eter-
nity, turned to God alone, the divine image appears in it shining. When, how-
ever, the soul turns away, even if it be to outward deeds of virtue, the divine
image is covered up” (Blakney, 77).
551. Raphael-Louis Oechslin, “Dépouillement: III. Au Moyen Âge,” DS
3, col. 471.
552. Oechslin, “Dépouillement,” col. 471 (condensed).
proper to thee, and hast delivered and abandoned thyself to God

with full confidence and all love, then all that is born or appears
in thee, whether exterior or interior, agreeable or disagreeable,
bitter or sweet, no longer belongs to thee but exclusively to thy
God to whom thou hast abandoned thyself. . . . ”553 This is his
doctrine of “equality” (Glichheit) and abandonment. It is not a
doctrine of stoic indifference. When we are completely aban-
doned to God then all our works, all our sufferings, the small
and the great, are all equally great because they all belong to God.
It is He who makes them valuable and precious. The secret of all
for Eckhart is then total abandonment and complete obedience
to God by the “inner work”554 which is the work of love, the recep-
tion of God’s work in us, and the renunciation and forgetfulness of
all else, every other concern. When one is thus perfectly obedient
to God “one becomes the Only Son” ({a} condemned proposi-
tion555). This he sums up in the expression: amare Deum sine modo
et qualibet proprietate includente modum556 (note {the} reminis-
cence of St. Bernard: “sine modo diligere”557). The key to it all is
perfect interior poverty: Quanto nudius, tanto capacius.558 Quanto
humilior, tanto capacior.559 On perfect interior poverty, he says: “He
is poor who wants nothing, knows nothing and has nothing.”560
One must not even “have a will with which to do the will of
553. Oechslin, “Dépouillement,” col. 472.

554. Oechslin, “Divinisation,” col. 1436.
555. Denzinger and Rahner, 228 (n. 520): “Quod bonus homo est unigenitus
Filius Dei” (“That the good man is the only-begotten Son of God”) (nn. 521 and
522 are similar statements).
556. “to love God without measure and without any property whatsoever
including measure” (Oechslin, “Eckhart,” col. 105).
557. “to love without measure” (De Diligendo Deo, cc. 1, 6 [PL 182, cols.
974D, 983D])
558. “the more naked, the more spacious” (Sermo 11, quoted in Oechslin,
“Eckhart,” col. 106).
559. “the more humble, the more spacious” (Sermo 35, quoted in Oechslin,
“Eckhart,” col. 107).
560. Oechslin, “Dépouillement,” col. 471.
God.”561 Note {the} hyperbole! In speaking of this poverty Eckhart

multiplies paradoxes and speaks in a way that could not help
giving offense.
The Errors of Eckhart: the orthodoxy of Eckhart is much dis-
cussed today, and even the best Catholic students (see DS IV: ar-
ticle on Eckhart562) seem to agree that he did not intend formal
heresy, but that he made many statements that invited condemna-
tion because of the bold and careless way he expressed them. He
used the vernacular to express very difficult truths. His vernacular
sermons were often given quite spontaneously and were taken
down hastily by nuns and laypeople without much education.
He had an extremely original mind and expressed himself very
freely and paradoxically, especially when he felt that his audience
was hungry for the kind of thing he was teaching. Hence he did
not watch himself, and relaxed his control. This lack of caution
was extremely dangerous at such a time. His statements had a
great effect, in an age when there was much turbulence and in-
dependence and many popular movements, some of them hereti-
cal and rebellious. The Inquisition was on the watch to prevent
the spread of dangerous doctrines and trouble, especially among
laypersons and nuns. Eckhart had his enemies. There were serious
rivalries between religious orders and theological schools. There
were people who were looking for opportunities to make trouble
for him, and he carelessly provided them with the opportunity.
Note that not all he said was in the vernacular, by any means. His
Latin tracts contained dangerous statements too, but here he was
on safer ground nevertheless. In 1326 the Inquisition at Cologne
condemned some of his statements and he appealed to the Holy
See. In 1329, after his death, the Holy See (at Avignon) declared
561. See Blakney, 228: “As long as a person keeps his own will, and thinks
it his will to fulfill the all-loving will of God, he has not that poverty of which
we are talking, for this person has a will with which he wants to satisfy the will
of God, and that is not right” (Sermo 52 [#28 in Blakney’s numbering]).
562. Oechslin, “Eckhart,” col. 96.
{that} seventeen propositions from Eckhart were heretical, and

eleven were “suspect” of heresy. Considering the times, the situa-
tion, and the boldness of some of his statements, what is surprising
is not that Eckhart was condemned, but that he got off so lightly
compared to many other unfortunates. If he had not been a dis-
tinguished churchman, it would have fared very badly with him.
Yet many of the things he said have been said, in slightly different
words, with greater discretion and theological accuracy, by many
of the saints.
Specific Errors (see Denzinger 501 ff.563): some concern the
creation of the world by God. Eckhart is accused of pantheism;
this is a misunderstanding. Some concern sin—statements about
how sin can give glory to God, {and is} not to be regretted. His
teaching seems to belittle prayer of petition, and says it is imper-
fect. N. 508 condemns his doctrine of poverty of spirit, that those
who have renounced everything, even the explicit intention to do
the will of God, give God the most glory. {N.} 510 condemns the
statement that we are united to God “without distinction.” Errors
{are found} concerning the necessity of exterior acts of virtue
(516, 517, 519), {along with} errors regarding the “divine filiation”
in us, in which he too closely identifies the soul and the Son of
God (512, 513, 521). NN. 501-515 are heretical, and these are the
ones that affect his doctrine of poverty of spirit, and the “not
willing not to have sinned,”564 {and} total union with God “with-
out distinction.”565 Also condemned as heretical is the statement
that there is something “uncreated”566 in the soul (namely the
vünkelin); but he himself protested against this interpretation of
his words: that which is uncreated in the soul is not any part of
the soul, but God present in the soul. Though Pourrat makes the
proper qualifications in regard to Eckhart’s doctrine, his whole
treatment of Eckhart is based on the condemned propositions
563. Denzinger and Rahner, 227–29 (nn. 501–29).

564. N. 514.
565. N. 510.
566. N. 527.
and not on Eckhart’s own work, with which he seems to have no

acquaintance.567 Such a treatment is inadequate and unfair. Oechs-
lin, in DS IV,568 concludes however that “with proper commentary
on the obscure and condemned passages, reestablishing the im-
plied context,” Eckhart’s works can be read today with profit.
We add, however, that in the monastery Eckhart should not be
read by those who have not finished theology, and even not by
all of these, because not all are able to make for themselves or
provide for others the “proper commentary” required. Eckhart
is for specialists and experts, not for the average contemplative.
He should be studied by Catholic scholars and not left to non-
Catholics to twist as they please. Note however that the extreme
statements of Eckhart are mitigated and given an orthodox sense
in the writings of Tauler and Ruysbroeck.
Through the influential Rhenish school, which reached the
Spanish mystics via Osuna and others in the Netherlands, much
of the mysticism of Eckhart, purified of its most extreme state-
ments, survives throughout the later mysticism of Spain and
France. The teachers of holy abandonment, both orthodox and
unorthodox, doubtless owe much to the teaching on poverty of
spirit given by the Rhenish mystics. What is valuable and to be
saved from Eckhart is present not only in Tauler and Ruysbroeck
but also in teachers like St. Francis de Sales and even St. Thérèse
of Lisieux, whose little way has many elements in common with
the “true poverty of spirit” of the Rhenish mystics and doubtless
is indebted to their heritage to some extent, since their influence
penetrated everywhere. Note: the English Mystics, for instance
Walter Hilton, preserve something of the same spirit. Hilton laid
down as a basic principle for the interior life the consciousness
that “I am nothing and I have nothing and I seek nothing but
567. Merton may be referring here to Pourrat’s discussion of Eckhart in

his Christian Spirituality (2.214-17), but he may also be referring to his article on
“Abandon” in the Dictionnaire de Spiritualité, in which his discussion of Eckhart
in the section “Histoire de Faux Abandon” consists almost exclusively of pas-
sages quoted and translated from Denzinger (vol. 1, cols. 38–40).
568. Oechslin, “Eckhart,” col. 113.
Jesus.”569 Note however that this is completely different from

Eckhart who pushed it so far that he said we must not even seek
God, or preserve the image of His Incarnate Word.
C. The Mysticism of John Tauler: there is no question of
the orthodoxy of Tauler and Suso. They are accepted by all and
Pourrat praises them.570 The great value of Tauler {is} his perfect-
ing of Augustinian psychology and mysticism, his synthesis
between Augustine and Denys.
I. John Tauler (1300-1361) {was} not a technical theologian but
a preacher and director of souls. His sermons also are preserved
in notes taken by his hearers (mostly nuns). His doctrine, {of the}
same school as Eckhart, based on {the} neo-Platonic and Diony-
sian background of {his} studies at Cologne, gives {the} essence
of what is taught by Eckhart but in a more correct form. His
psychology {places} emphasis on the “ground” of the soul, and
the deep will (gemüt) but {there is} no error about an “uncreated
element” in the soul. When the gemüt is divinized it does not be-
come indistinguishable from God.571
Psychology of Tauler (the Interior Man): his psychology is
based on the traditional (Greek) concept of the threefold division
in man: (1) animalis—exterior man; (2) rationalis—interior man;
(3) spiritualis—superior man: the “noble” man. It is the superior
569. Walter Hilton, The Scale of Perfection, II.21 (compressed), in Colledge,

Medieval Mystics, 247: “Say ‘I am nothing, I have nothing, and I want nothing
except one thing’; and even though you do not always need to be repeating
these words in your thoughts, keep their meaning constantly in your intention
and in the habit of your soul. Humility says ‘I am nothing, I have nothing.’ Love
says ‘I want nothing except one thing, and that is Jesus.’”
570. Pourrat, Christian Spirituality, 2.217-22.
571. See Merton’s journal entry for May 23, 1960: “Tauler—Gemüt and the
Grund—turning the whole desire and strength of the soul to the emptiness, the
mirror in which God appears—which is the very mirror being of our being!”
(Thomas Merton, Search for Solitude, 394).
or noble man that is the gemüt, or rather the grund to which the
gemüt directs itself to find God.572
a) The grund is called the mens and {the} summit of {the} soul.
It is the place where the image of God is found. It has no name.
It is “closely related”573 to God (not “identified with Him”). It is
in and by the grund that God is united to us in an ineffable man-
ner. “It is there [the grund] that is found profound silence. No
creature and no image have ever penetrated there. Here the soul
does not act and has no knowledge, here she knows nothing of
herself, of any image, or of any creature.”574 It is a passive receptiv-
ity upon which God alone acts, when He is left free to do so.
b) The gemüt—or deep will—is again above the faculties,
above their ordinary action. When left free it plunges down into
the grund, to seek God in His image. It is therefore a dynamic
power of conversion to God, a gravitational force of love, and the
inner source of all our activities. It is that by which we give ourselves
in the deepest sense of the word. It is the gravitation to God as
our origin. Free will can forcibly direct its power to another ob-
ject, but it still longs for God.
c) {In the} summit of union, the gemüt is divinized in divine
union. “The gemüt recognizes itself as God in God, while nevertheless
remaining created.”575 Here Tauler restates Eckhart’s paradox, with
sufficient qualification to avoid being condemned. Like Eckhart
he describes mysticism as the birth of God in the ground of the
soul. Note: behind all this is the Augustinian maxim: Amor meus
pondus meum.576 {In} his asceticism and mysticism, like Eckhart
572. John Tauler, Sermon 64.4, quoted in A. L. Corin, “Introduction

Théologique,” in Sermons de Tauler, trans. E. Hugueny, op, G. Théry, op, and A.
L. Corin, 3 vols. (Paris: Desclée, 1927), 1.74.
573. Sermon 56.5, quoted in Corin, 1.75.
574. Sermon for the First Sunday after Christmas (not included in the critical
edition of Tauler), quoted in Corin, 1.75–76.
576. “My love is my weight” (Augustine, Confessions, 13.9 [PL 32, col.
849]); see Cassian and the Fathers, 235, n. 618, for a discussion of Merton’s use of
he insists on self-stripping and poverty, but he does not go to the

extremes of Eckhart in his language. “All that a man rests in with
joy, all that he retains as a good belonging to himself is all worm-
eaten, except for absolute and simple vanishing in the pure, un-
knowable, ineffable and mysterious good which is God by
renunciation of ourselves and of all that can appear in Him.”577
Tauler reminds {us} of the part played by Mary in the contempla-
tive life. He emphasizes the sacraments, especially the Eucharist.
He gives a great place to the Gifts of the Holy Ghost in his mysticism578
(cf. St. Thomas579). It is the gifts of wisdom and understanding
that lead to the “abyss without name.”580 Tauler clearly empha-
sizes passive purification by the Holy Spirit. Passive purification
restores the likeness of the divine image in man. Besides all the
other ordinary forms of self-love and attachment from which we
must be purified, there is above all that self-will in the things of
God, “wanting our own will to be carried out in all the things of God
and even in God Himself.”581 This purification takes a long time.
Tauler believes one is not ripe for deep contemplation before he
is forty years old. This is not to be taken as absolute, but there is
a certain wisdom in it. Time is important. Tauler thinks the years
between forty and fifty are very important—the ideal time for
passive purification. “When a man is young he must not travel
fully in the land of vision; he can only make sallies into it and
withdraw once again, as long as he has not fully grown.”582 Tauler
insists on the importance of meditation for those who are young
in the spiritual life. For those who are progressing, the great thing
this quotation in his dialogue with D. T. Suzuki (Thomas Merton, Zen and the
Birds of Appetite [New York: New Directions, 1968], 127).
577. Sermon 46, quoted in G. Théry, op, “Introduction Historique,” in Sermons
de Tauler, 1.16.
578. Sermon 26; see Histoire de Spiritualité, vol. 2, 467; ET: 390.
579. For Thomas’s discussion of the gifts of the Holy Spirit, see 1a 2ae, q.
68, in Summa Theologiae, ed. Gilby, 24:2/3–40/41.
581. Sermon 19, quoted in Corin, 1.96.
582. Sermon 2.5, quoted in Corin, l.97–98.
is patience and trust in tribulation, especially in passive purifica-

tion—not seeking relief from creatures but waiting patiently for
the “new birth” of God within them.
Two Texts from Tauler on humility and patience in trial, as the
sign of the true spiritual man:
a) If your boat is solidly anchored, all will go well. Remain

in yourself. Do not go running about outside; be patient
until the end; seek no other thing. Certain men, when they
find themselves in this interior poverty, run around seek-
ing always some new means of escape from anguish, and
this does them great harm. Either they go and complain
and question the teachers of the spiritual life, and they
come back more troubled than they went. Remain without
misgivings in this trial. After the darkness will come the
brightness of the sun. Keep yourself from seeking anything
else, just as you would guard yourself against death. Be
satisfied to wait. Believe me, there never arises any anguish
in man that God does not desire to prepare a new birth in
that man. Know that whatever comes to deliver you from
oppression or appease it, will be born in you. That is what
will be born in you, either God or the creature. Now think
about it. If it is a creature that takes away your anguish,
whatever may be its name, that creature steals from you
the birth of God (Serm. 41, #3).583
b) When man has tasted this altogether interior piety it
makes him plunge down and sink in his own nothingness
and littleness, for the more brightly the greatness of God
shines for him, the more easily he recognizes his littleness
and nothingness. . . . It is by this that one recognizes
that there has really been an illumination from God if the
light, instead of touching the images and faculties of the
soul, has gone straight to the depths. These beloved men
are thirsty for suffering and humiliation, to imitate their
well-beloved Lord Jesus Christ. They fall neither into false
583. Quoted in Corin, 1.99-100.

activity nor into false liberty and do not divert themselves,

flying about like butterflies with their reason. For in their
own eyes they are little and nothing and that is why they
are great and precious before God.584
Tauler and Eckhart and other points:

a) He openly defends Eckhart: “You have not understood
this beloved Master because he was speaking from the point of
view of eternity and you have judged him from the point of view
of time” (Serm. 15).585
b) He takes up the most characteristic doctrines of Eckhart
and corrects them, giving them an orthodox expression.
c) Some think Tauler was, of the two, the truer mystic, that
his correction of Eckhart was also based on a more real and more
profound experience. (Note—Suso in his Orologium Sapientiae
also defends Eckhart; for this he was deposed as prior.586)
d) Tauler, like Ruysbroeck, combated {the} errors of Beghards
and {the} Brethren of {the} Free Spirit.
e) Tauler clearly manifested his devotion to and obedience
to the Holy See.
f) Luther was a devoted student of Tauler. John Eck attacked
Tauler in attacking Luther. Louis de Blois replied in defense of
Tauler, stating that his orthodoxy is beyond question. This led to
an edition of Tauler by St. Peter Canisius in 1543.587 Nevertheless
the Jesuits forbade the reading of Tauler in 1578—{the} Capuchins
also.588 But he was rehabilitated in the seventeenth century.589
g) Tauler, in a warning printed as a preface to his Sermons,590
points out four errors to be avoided in following the way of mysti-
cal emptiness and freedom. In general the mystical life does seem
584. Sermon 44.5, quoted in Corin, 1.102-103.

585. Quoted in Théry, 1.26.
586. See Félix Vernet, “Allemande (Spiritualité),” DS 1, col. 328.
587. See Théry, 1.44-47.
588. See Théry, 1.52-53.
589. See Théry, 1.54.
590. Tauler, Sermons, 1.157-62.
and is dangerous to those who cannot abandon themselves, re-

nouncing the inclinations of flesh and blood, and letting go of
their thoughts and reasonings, to be guided by the Holy Spirit
and by the Friends of God. The four errors are:
1) exterior living, by the natural wisdom of the senses; on
the contrary one must cultivate the interior life, which means for
Tauler living in the present with a pure desire to please God alone and
submitting to His will at every moment in privation as well as
in plenty of material and spiritual things.
2) revelations and visions—attachment to these is to be
avoided, though such things may sometimes come from God;
those who seek and cherish them suffer great harm.
3) relying on reason {and making} excessive intellectual ef-
fort under the stimulations of natural light, and taking too much
pleasure in this kind of activity; {he stresses the} danger of useless
speculations.
4) blank passivity, mere inactivity, sleeping in self-absorp-
tion, blank and empty stupidity—the inexperienced attach them-
selves stubbornly to this kind of false emptiness, imagining it is
the true emptiness of contemplation.
Remedies {include} genuine zeal for good, without attachment
to practices, and with alert, peaceful attention to the inspirations of
grace, proper use of meditation as long as it is necessary, avoidance
of false passivity, especially during youth, acceptance of suffering
and privation, active charity, prayer, patience and long experience. On
these we can rest the structure of contemplative unknowing.
Henry Suso {was} a “minnesinger”591 of mystical love. In reac-
tion to the Eckhart crisis, while defending Eckhart, {he} tries to make
mysticism more acceptable. {He} emphasizes his own personal ex-
perience {in} autobiographical {writings}. {Among the} qualifications
{he makes, in} speaking of the transformation of man in Christ, and
deification, {he} no longer declares that there is no distinction, but
that the mystic feels no distinction, between the soul and God.
591. Vernet, col. 327.

The Theologia Germanica (Theologia Deutsch) {is} by an anony-

mous author, of Frankfurt, {at the} end of {the} fourteenth century,
a “friend of God.” This is in bad repute because Luther liked it
and published an edition of it, appealing to it to support his op-
position between faith and works. It was this fact, that Luther
relied on the mystics, who minimized personal action, that helped
to bring them into disrepute. The orthodoxy of {the} Theologia
Germanica is hotly debated. It is supposed to have pantheistic
tendencies. However the Theologia Germanica points out errors
of heretical movements, false “Friends of God.”592 We meet in it
the familiar themes: the union of man with God by complete
stripping of the self and of its activity; interior illumination by
the “true light which is a seed of God and produces the fruits of
God”;593 interior life which is “beyond expression,”594 in which
the activity of God gradually substitutes for the activity of man,
culminating in “deification,”595 {the} synthesis of action and con-
templation. These have by now become standard themes, and
we are thoroughly familiar with them.
It remains to be said that the history of these themes needs to
be understood:
a) Remember that parallel to the orthodox Christian mysti-
cism of the Rhineland was an unorthodox popular tradition
largely withdrawn from ecclesiastical control. This unorthodox
tradition exaggerated and distorted the themes familiar in the mys-
tics. In doctrine, they tend to say without qualification that man
either becomes God or returns to an original supposed “identity”
with God which he never had really lost. In ascetic practice, if man
is really one with God all the time, then personal responsibility
tends to vanish: either one can pass beyond good and evil by
592. See Chiquot, cols. 496–97, citing the introduction to the Theologia Ger-
manica, where the “false friends” are identified with the “free spirits, enemies of
divine justice, who are so harmful to the Church.”
593. Theologia Germanica, c. 40.
594. Theologia Germanica, c. 21.
595. Theologia Germanica, cc. 32, 33, 35, 37, 41, 43.
simply ceasing to act and by remaining “passive,” in which case

“God acts,” or else one need not resist passions or reject sinful
tendencies because they are the work of a fleshly self from which
one is dissociated, or else God is responsible. There follows a re-
jection of sacramental and institutional life—of confession, of the
Eucharist, of meditation, of personal devotion to Christ, the
saints, etc. In many cases these errors can be summed up as a
misapplication of figurative language that has meaning only for
the rare case of the mystic united with God in passivity. Figures
of speech valid for mystical union are taken and put in the context
of ordinary Christian life. Hence everyone “becomes a mystic” by
ceasing to act, by deliberately remaining passive. Everyone is
encouraged to pursue this “easy and direct way.” Hence people
who are weak, who are beginners, who cannot advance without
the help of ordinary means provided by the Church, are deprived
of those means. In trying to attain to a more direct and immediate
union with God, by deliberate passivity, they actually resign
themselves to following irrational forces in themselves, and yield
to passion and even to sin, at the same time rejecting responsibil-
ity for their acts. This false passivity was condemned by the great
mystics themselves, notably by Ruysbroeck, Tauler, etc.
b) The Dictionnaire de Spiritualité sums up its evaluation of
the German mystics as follows:596 the orthodox mystics of the
Rhineland and Flanders were not in any real sense precursors of
Luther; {they} were not pantheists or quietists, but their language
could be misinterpreted and has to be carefully understood. Eck-
hart is a special case: his language is very imprudent and errone-
ous and consequently he is apart from the safe Rhenish mystics
like Tauler; however he is a writer of unparalleled originality and
genius, the greatest of the Rhenish mystics in this respect; some
doubt whether he was a “mystic” but their doubt is transparently
foolish. Tauler and Suso, as well as Ruysbroeck, are fully ortho-
dox, fully acceptable, and should be read by contemplatives, if
596. Vernet, cols. 329–30.

not by Jesuits. The Theologia Germanica is acceptable. Some of the

Friends of God are to be taken with caution.
D. The Reaction to German Mysticism
1) Defenders and followers of Eckhart: we have seen that
Tauler and Suso defended Eckhart. Nicholas of Cusa, {a} cardinal
{and} a very important and interesting figure in the fifteenth
century, worked for reunion of East and West at {the} Council of
Florence; {he} was envoy to {the} Greek emperor at Constanti-
nople {and} studied {the} Koran there. {A} friend of Benedictines
and Carthusians, {he wrote} De Docta Ignorantia, {a work} in {the}
Dionysian tradition {of a} speculative {character}, {as well as} De
Visione Dei, written for Benedictines. In regard to Eckhart, Nicholas
of Cusa defended him against {the} charge of pantheism, but
admitted he was not to be read by all; the mere fact of his ap-
proving of Eckhart made Nicholas himself suspect, in the general
reaction.597 Luther pointed to Tauler and to the Theologia Germanica
as to models and sources, hence bringing them into disrepute598
(see above).
2) Attacks on the Rhenish mystics: Cardinal Peter d’Ailly at-
tacked {the} orthodoxy of Ruysbroeck. {He} substitutes for {the}
speculative mysticism of Rhenish and Flemish mystics a “safe
mysticism” based on St. Bonaventure, highly systematic, and
with emphasis on the spiritual senses: thirteen chapters of his
compendium on contemplation deal with the spiritual senses.599
Jean Gerson {is} an interesting case. {As} chancellor of {the} Uni-
versity of Paris {he} attacked William of St. Thierry and Ruys-
broeck together as pantheists, {and was} also opposed to St.
Bridget and St. Catherine, their visions, etc. Yet {he was} not anti-
mystical as such. He opposes the two extremes of dark and vi-
sionary mysticism {and} returns to the “middle”; Evelyn Underhill

599. See above, n. 205.
calls him a “second Bonaventure.”600 {He} emphasizes spiritual

direction, discernment of spirits, but also the positive side of
Dionysius, and St. Augustine of course. The trend represented
by Gerson and D’Ailly, suspicious of extremes, emphasizing at
best a “safe” mysticism, but tending to shy completely away from
speculative mysticism, prepares the way for the Jesuit spirituality
of the sixteenth century, which we will consider in a moment.
This, with the Devotio Moderna, represents the accepted doctrine
since the Council of Trent, the “main line” of Catholic spirituality
in the West—active, devotional, subjective, non-mystical.
The Devotio Moderna was in great part a reaction against the
speculative mysticism of the Rhineland and Flanders, as well as
against the false popular mysticism with quietistic trends. Gerhard
Groote (d. 1384) {was a} contemporary of the mystics, but reacted
against mysticism, though {a} friend of Ruysbroeck. {He was a}
preacher and missionary, {a} deacon only ({who} refused priest-
hood out of humility), {and} wrote many letters of direction,
{along with works of} autobiographical piety. {He was a} critic of
the infidelities of monks and clergy, {of} the false mystics that
abounded, especially with pantheistic and quietistic tendencies,
{and of} the speculative mystics. {His} spirituality {was} centered
on morality, good conduct, fidelity of life, charity, humility. Con-
templation {was} devaluated, and methodical meditation on
Christ, especially on the Passion, {was} preached instead of con-
templative prayer. {There was an} insistence that perfection of
charity is what matters. In other words, a duality of ways of per-
fection tends to grow up, one active and ordinary, the other con-
templative and extraordinary.
The Brethren of the Common Life {was} established at Deventer,
Holland, in 1383, and became a center for dissemination of the
Devotio Moderna. The foundation at Windesheim especially influ-
enced clerical and religious life everywhere. There was consider-
able discussion of and opposition to the Brethren of the Common
600. Underhill, 810.

Life, especially by the clergy who resented {its} criticism of laxity.

The Brethren of {the} Common Life were sometimes accused of
being unorthodox but such accusations were irresponsible and
unjust. Groote was forbidden to preach in 1383 and when he died
in l384 the event was hailed with jubilation by his (clerical) ene-
mies. Thomas à Kempis (fifteenth century), accepted as most prob-
ably {the} author of the Imitation {of Christ}, {is} typical of the
Brethren of {the} Common Life. Like Groote, {he places} emphasis
on fidelity to ordinary duties, to Christian morality on the ordi-
nary level, to charity and humility, {on} affective, subjective and
individualistic devotion, especially meditation on the humanity
of Christ and the Passion, {as well as on} simplicity. The Imitation
is a compendium of all that is most healthy and less extreme in
medieval asceticism. It represents the safe way, the middle of the
way, and invites all to seek sanctity by ordinary means, which never-
theless demand heroism. The Devotio Moderna and the Imitation
are blamed for being non-liturgical, and for substituting individu-
alistic and subjective devotion to liturgical and communal spir-
ituality. However this is not to be blamed on these holy men alone:
it was inevitable that they should place this type of emphasis in
their time. The times themselves created the situation. Note also
{the following} characteristics of this school:
a) a tendency to anti-intellectualism, to a complete separa-
tion between sacred learning on the one hand and piety on the
other, as if they were opposed.
b) emphasis on {a} contrast between nature and grace, nature
now taken in the sense of fallen nature: {a} radical opposition
between the two {is posited}.
In the sixteenth century, the Inquisition tends to condemn or
withdraw from circulation all mystical writings. They are auto-
matically considered suspect, and popular reading of them is
discouraged, especially the mystics of Germany and the Low
Countries.601 In the seventeenth century, J. P. Camus (1640) attacks

the “passives,”602 including Tauler. Bossuet, in his reaction against

Fénelon, is to a great extent following Gerson’s criticism of Ruys-
broeck; Bossuet criticizes the Rhenish mystics, with qualifications,
admitting Tauler as one of the “more solid of the mystics.”603
The Jesuits: in general the spirituality of the Jesuits was anti-
mystical, though the Society produced some great contemplatives
and mystics. In 1575 Mercurian, the General of the Society {of}
Jesus, forbids {the reading of} Tauler, Suso, St. Gertrude,
Mechtilde, Harphius, Ruysbroeck, etc. {They are} not to be read
by Jesuits because {they are} “not well adjusted to our institute.”604
Note {that} this does not imply a criticism for heresy; it is under-
stood that writers like Eckhart would not even be considered. {It
is} important that here we have a great religious order with a
well-defined systematic policy in spiritual matters—a policy to
which mysticism is considered foreign.
St. Ignatius: we cannot treat him adequately here—just a brief
note. His Spiritual Exercises are not intentionally either pro- or
anti-mystical. They are intended to help a man to open up his
mind and heart to divine grace and to make, with the help of
grace, a crucial decision, on which his whole life and vocation de-
pend. One does not normally decide to “become a mystic” or
even a contemplative in the intimate sense of the word. But the
Exercises might conceivably, in an individual case, dispose a con-
templative person to receive a special grace that would open up
a new way to him. However systematic means should be consid-
ered normally unfavorable in an advanced mystical life marked
by definite passivity. (Note: a precursor of St. Ignatius in methodi-
cal meditation is the Benedictine Garcia Cisneros [sixteenth cen-
tury]; in the history of methodical meditation, St. Ailred’s De

604. Vernet, cols. 328–29.
Institutione Inclusarum605 is important, also the meditations of

Stephen of Salley606—both Cistercians of the twelfth century.)
The Jesuits and mysticism in the sixteenth century: it would be
false to imagine that the Jesuits conducted a systematic anti-
mystical campaign. On the contrary, St. Teresa owed much to her
Jesuit confessors and to their support. However, they were very
unfriendly to “passivity.” Balthasar Alvarez (confessor of St. Teresa
and novice master of the Society {of} Jesus) {was} considered an
exemplary Jesuit, and always retained the confidence of his su-
periors. But he began teaching {about} “retiring from the noise
of creatures, withdrawing to the depths of the heart to adore God
in spirit”607 {and} “remaining in the presence of God with senti-
ments of love, either dwelling on images if profitable, or not
dwelling on them”608 (when it is no longer profitable). In other
words, he was teaching what St. Teresa called the prayer of simple
recollection and what modern devotional writers have also called
the prayer of simplicity or simple regard. He was censored by the
Society and forbidden to teach this. His doctrine was classified
as “intolerable”609 and “contrary to the Spiritual Exercises.”610 Is
605. Aelred of Rievaulx, De Institutione Inclusarum, in Aelredi Rievallensis

Opera Omnia, vol. 1: Opera Ascetica, ed. C. H. Talbot, CCCL 1 (Turnholt: Brepols,
1971), 635–82; ET: Aelred of Rievaulx, Treatises and Pastoral Prayer: On Jesus at the
Age of Twelve; Rule for a Recluse; The Pastoral Prayer, CF 2 (Kalamazoo: Cistercian
Publications, 1971). In his Aelred of Rievaulx: A Study, CS 50 (Kalamazoo: Cister-
cian Publications, 1981), Aelred Squire writes, “Aelred’s meditative technique
had a great future before it in later medieval methods of prayer” (69).
606. Stephen of Sawley, Treatises, trans. Jeremiah F. O’Sullivan, CF 36 (Kal-
amazoo: Cistercian, 1984); Stephen is actually a thirteenth-century writer, prob-
ably dying in 1252 (sometimes given as 1245); Dom André Wilmart, in “Le Triple
Exercice d’Étienne de Sallai,” Revue d’Ascétique et de Mystique, 11 (1930), sees this
work as one of the earliest examples of methodical prayer (356).
607. M. Olphe-Galliard, “Contemplation: A. Enquête Historique: IX. Au
XVe Siècle: 6. Contemplation Ignatienne,” DS 2, col. 2027.
608. Olphe-Galliard, “Contemplation,” col. 2027.
609. Olphe-Galliard, “Contemplation,” col. 2027.
610. Olphe-Galliard, “Contemplation,” col. 2026 (paraphrased).
this strictly true? Suarez, who was always respected by the Car-
melites and who defended St. John of the Cross, tried to empha-
size a certain contemplative orientation in the Spiritual Exercises.
Claudio Acquaviva, {the Jesuit} General, wrote in 1590 an official
Letter on Mental Prayer in which it was stated that true and perfect
contemplation was an aid to virtue and a source of apostolic zeal.
Alvarez de Paz entered {the} Society {of} Jesus in 1578 and was
sent to Peru in 1584. He spent the rest of his life in Peru, taught
theology and Scripture at Lima, became provincial, {and} died
in {the} odor of sanctity {in} 1620. His doctrine is largely patristic,
especially influenced by St. Bernard. Since he is also influenced
by Hugh of Balma (“Bonaventure”) he is in the medieval mystical
tradition, and his emphasis on “infused love without previous
knowledge”611 is by no means typical of the Society. Alvarez de
Paz first uses the term affective prayer.612 In regard to the desire
for contemplation, {his teaching is}: in the sense of extraordinary
manifestations, ecstasies, etc.—no; in the sense of “wisdom”
which is a great means to perfection—yes. He influenced Surin,
and the later generation of Jesuit mystics. Note: here we see con-
templation almost ordered as a means to a further end, the apos-
tolate. It is certainly valued in relation to this end.
E. Summary and Outline: the separation of mysticism and
theology in the West {began in the} late Middle Ages ({for} back-
ground {see} Joachim, the prophet {and his} “Age of the Holy
Ghost” {in the} twelfth century):
1. {In the} thirteenth century, Thomas Gallus, a Dionysian,
uses apophatic theology against scholastic theology, opposes
contemplation and science (Franciscan spirituals idem).
2. {In the} thirteenth century, the Béguines, Beghards {and}
other popular movements not only oppose piety to official the-
ology, but also tend to withdraw from the clergy, and to stress
mystical love. In many quarters there is a new stress on the mar-
611. E. Hernandez, “Alvarez de Paz,” DS 1, col. 408.

612. Hernandez, col. 408, citing A. Poulain, “Alvarez de Paz,” Dictionnaire de
Théologie Catholique, 15 vols. (Paris: Letouzey et Ané, 1908–1950), vol. 1, col. 929.
velous and the miraculous. {There is a} “prophetic” sense that

God is acting directly among special groups of mystics, and that
the mediation of the visible Church is now negligible.
3. {In the} fourteenth century, the speculative mysticism of
the Rhineland is an attempt of the Church, through the mendi-
cants and especially the Dominicans, inspired by St. Albert the
Great, to reintegrate mysticism and theology. There was a successful
synthesis, in which theology and mysticism are once again inti-
mately united. Yet scholastic methods and technical theology are
to some extent played down.
4. Official theology reacts through the Inquisition.
5. The Schoolmen react with Nominalism, in which technical
theology moves further away from the spiritual life into arid
speculation.
6. {The} Devotio Moderna is another reaction against specu-
lative mysticism: an affective and moral reaction, individualistic
and subjective, pietistic.
7. By the fifteenth century, the break between mysticism and
theology is definite and irrevocable. Mysticism is suspect, observed
by {the} Inquisition. The popular mystics, who tend more and
more to despise authority, go further and further into the extraor-
dinary, the weird, {including} the great growth of superstitions,
confusion of strange ideas and devotions, the “end of the world”
complex, the “dance of death.”
8. The Humanistic reaction: from this confusion of decadent
theology and degraded mysticism mingled with superstition and
magic, healthy minds seek an escape in humanistic culture. This
leads to a further dilution and secularization of the spiritual life.
9. By the sixteenth century, Protestants seek a direct return
to God in the Gospel, almost entirely discarding theology, retain-
ing only a little of fourteenth-century mystical piety, and in some
cases an affinity for the new humanism.
10. Mysticism has now to be revived as a specialty for con-
templatives by profession. This will be the work above all of the
discalced Carmelites. But it is to be noted that in this work, they
will strive once more to reintegrate mysticism and theology.
X. Spanish Mysticism
1. The background: {Note the} importance of the Spanish mysti-
cal school. Mysticism was both popular and deep-rooted. There are
said to have been 3,000 mystical writers in the Golden Age (mostly
unpublished). What is especially attractive about the Spanish
mystics is their personality, their individuality, their “truth”: we
know these qualities in St. Teresa, but forget they are characteristic
of all the Spanish mystics. {Note the} difference between Rhenish
and Spanish mysticism: as to background, Rhenish mysticism
springs up in a time of confusion and decay, amid many anti-
authoritarian freely mystical movements, some orthodox, some
heretical, {whereas} Spanish {mysticism} appears in a time of
official reform, unity, centralization, authority, strict control, na-
tional expansion and prosperity. The Moors have been driven out,
America discovered. {The} national consciousness of Spain {is}
wide awake: Catholic consciousness {is} also wide awake. {It is
the} Golden Age of literature and painting (painters {more in the}
seventeenth century). A general unity of life and growth {devel-
ops} in {the} arts and in {the} spiritual life, all together. St. Teresa’s
brother was among the conquistadores in Ecuador. The authoritar-
ian control grows more and more strict, but the genuine mystics are
not discouraged. They triumph over all obstacles. Note the sudden
ness with which Spanish mysticism begins in the fifteenth {and}
sixteenth centuries, with no previous tradition. (Ramon Lull, the
only medieval mystic in Spain, is Catalan and has no influence
on the Castilians until relatively late; {he is} not even translated
until late.) Some dates: 1469: Spain {is} united under Ferdinand
and Isabella; 1472: the Inquisition becomes permanent under
Torquemada; 1492: {the} Fall of Granada and Columbus’ first
voyage; 1512: {the} Inquisition, previously occupied with Jews
and Moslems, now turns to Alumbrados and Erasmians.
Reformers {include} Cardinal Francisco Ximenes de Cisneros,
{who} starts {a} movement of reform before Trent:
a) {in the} universities: {he} founds {the} University of Alcala

{in} 1498; Salamanca {is} reformed—{it} has 8,000 students.
b) {in} printing: Ximenes uses {the} printing press for spiritual

reform; {he} compiled {the} Polyglot Bible; {in} 1490, {the} Imitation
of Christ {was} printed; 1500 {saw the} printing of St. Basil, St. Je-
rome (read by St. Teresa), St. Augustine; Denis the Carthusian
{appeared in} three Spanish editions in seven years; {in} 1503
{Ximenes} prints Ludolph the Carthusian, Vita Christi, {and in}
1504 {he} prints {a} translation of St. John Climacus (this was also
the first book printed in the Americas); also {published were the}
life of St. Catherine of Siena, works of St. Mechtilde of Hack-
bourn, Blessed Angela of Foligno, Hugh of Balma, {the} Dialogues
of St. Gregory {the} Great, {the} Vitae Patrum (some of these were
later forbidden by the Inquisition). {Note the} importance of
books in the prayer life of St. Teresa and other mystics: they were
great readers.
Ven. Garcia de Cisneros ({a} relative of the above) {was} the
first of the Spanish mystics. Abbot of Monserrate (b. 1455; d.
1510), {he} was sent to reform Monserrate from Valladolid at {the}
request of Ferdinand and Isabella. {In} 1500 {he wrote the} Book
of Spiritual Exercises, intended primarily for monks; {he was} in-
fluenced by {the} Devotio Moderna. {He also wrote the} Directory
of Canonical Hours to help the monks recite {the} office devoutly.
Neither of these works is mystical. {The} Exercises starts with
meditations for {the} purgative way, to follow Matins, then {uses
the} traditional medieval pattern: lectio, meditatio, contemplatio.
{He} insists that we should desire contemplation. {His} sources,
besides the Western Fathers, especially Augustine and Gregory
the Great, {include} Dionysius, Hugh of Balma, St. Bernard; Jo-
hann Mombaer’s Rosetum {is} another source, and Gerson, and
Suso. {It is a} paradox {that it was this work of} systematic imagi-
native meditation which inspired St. Ignatius, with {the} purpose
of union with God “without mean.”613
613. Merton’s reference is obscure here, since the phrase “without mean”
is not found in the Spiritual Exercises; he is perhaps referring to the “consolation
without previous cause” that Ignatius includes in his Rules for the Discernment
Spiritual trends, deviations, and reactions against them: eucha-

ristic devotion was very strong. Francisco de Osuna, recommend-
ing daily communion, was withdrawn from circulation by the
Inquisition. An extreme practice {arose} of carrying the sacred
Host about on one’s person, out of devotion. This was of course
forbidden. Erasmianism {became influential} (Erasmus was trans-
lated in 1527). This trend was at once humanistic and evangelical;
{it} emphasized interior reform, Christ in us, {and had a} tendency
to emphasize “freedom of spirit”; {it was} anti-formalistic. {It was
a} real renovation, but the authorities were against it and prose-
cuted it as heretical.
Illuminism (the Alumbrados) {was of} two kinds: the Recogidos,
{with an} overstress on mental prayer, {and} the Dejados, {with
an} overstress on abandonment. Both {included} strong neo-Pla-
tonic and Averroist elements, {and showed the} influence of {the}
Rhenish mystics, Beghards, etc. Errors on prayer {included} mak-
ing all perfection consist in interior prayer: by this alone one is
saved, {so that} it must be preferred to obedience, to sacraments,
etc.; it is purely passive. True prayer can be entered simply by
becoming passive and excluding all thoughts. When one is purely
inactive then he is, due to that fact, moved by God. (This is really the
crux of the error and is essential to illuminism.) By this inactivity
one attains to direct vision of the divine essence. This is essen-
tially the same as the Quietist heresy in regard to mental prayer.
It implies a complete misunderstanding and oversimplification
of the relations between nature and grace—or even of what they
are, {and does} not even {give} a very accurate notion of what
constitutes “human activity.” In outline, the oversimplification
is: my activity = natural = bad; God’s activity = supernatural =
good. Hence, suppress my activity and God alone will act. This
is a completely mythical conception of man and of God.
of Spirits (see The Spiritual Exercises of St. Ignatius, trans. Anthony Mottola [Gar-
den City, NY: Doubleday Image, 1964], 133).
The Inquisition was very zealous in stamping out illuminism,

but unfortunately went to the opposite extreme, seeing illumi-
nism everywhere, even in the Spiritual Exercises of St. Ignatius.
Melchior Cano, op, {was} a “great theologian”614 and an anti-mysti-
cal zealot; he was one of the guiding spirits of the Spanish Inqui-
sition. Examples of some of his activities {include}:
a) A Dominican cardinal, a pious man, wrote a Commentary
on the Catechism. Cano had him condemned and thrown in prison.
Even the pope failed to get him out. He was in prison for six
years.
b) Ignatius Loyola: Cano attacked Ignatius as a “latter-day
seducer”615 even though Ignatius had been approved by the pope.
The Exercises were censured for “illuminism.” Of him Cano said:
“This Company of Jesus has for general a certain Ignatius who
fled from Spain when the Inquisition wished to arrest him as a
heretic of the sect of the Alumbrados”616 (1548).
614. Pourrat calls him “a poor mystic” but “a theologian of the first rank”
(Pierre Pourrat, Christian Spirituality, vol. III: Later Developments: From the Renais-
sance to Jansenism, trans. W. H. Mitchell and S. P. Jacques [1927; Westminster,
MD: Newman, 1953], 101).
615. Cano applied to the Jesuits the verse from 2 Timothy 3.6 about those
who “make their way into houses and captivate silly women who are sin-laden
and led away by various lusts” (Confraternity trans.): see Antonio Astrain, Historia
de la Compañía de Jesús en la Asistencia de España, 7 vols. (Madrid: Sucesores de
Rivadeneyra, 1902-25), 1.326: “. . . seduciendo á las mujercillas y llevando en
pos de sí á los ignorantes”; Astrain’s chapter “Persecución de Melchor Cano”
(321–40) provides a thorough discussion of Cano’s antipathy.
616. Melchor Cano, Censura y Parecer contra el Instituto de los Padres Jesuitas,
4; this work also contains allegations of sexual license (7, 10). For a description,
see Terence O’Reilly, “Melchor Cano and the Spirituality of St Ignatius Loyola,”
in Ignacio de Loyola y su Tiempo, ed. Juan Plazaola (Bilbao: Ediciones Mensajero,
1992), 369–80, reprinted (with the same pagination) in Terence O’Reilly, From
Ignatius Loyola to John of the Cross: Spirituality and Literature in Sixteenth-Century
Spain (Brookfield, VT: Variorum, 1995), where it is followed by a complete tran-
scription of the Censura from a British Library manuscript. O’Reilly believes that
internal evidence dates the document’s composition between 1552 and 1556,
rather than 1548 (370).
c) Various: Francisco de Osuna {was} put on {the} Index for

urging daily communion. Luis de Granada {was} put on {the}
Index for teaching lay people to meditate. Blessed Juan de Avila
{was} put on {the} Index chiefly because he had Jewish blood.
Luis de Leon was five years in prison for translating the Canticle
of Canticles into Spanish. In 1551, the Index prohibited the Bible
in the vulgar tongue.
d) 1559: the Index of 1559 included books of St. Francis Bor-
gia, Bl. John of Avila, Luis de Granada, Tauler, Herp, Denis the
Carthusian (at least in the vernacular).
It will be seen that the chief concern of the Inquisition was
not with the Bible or mysticism as such but as preached to the laity.
In so many words, too deep an interest in the interior life was
considered dangerous for all but experts. Lay people were to be
confined to “safe” exterior practices of devotion. It was in the
midst of this that St. Teresa and St. John of the Cross not only
survived but flourished. This should be sufficient indication of
the sureness of their mystical doctrine which of course was ex-
amined by the Inquisition. (Read: on the state of mind created
by this, and the same conclusions reached by Francisco de Osuna,
to make up his own mind, see {the} quote of Osuna in Peers,
Studies of {the} Spanish Mystics, p. 75.617)
617. In this passage, from Book 5, chapter 2 of The Third Spiritual Alpha-
bet, Osuna speaks of a book that had aroused him from spiritual indifference
to love for the Lord, which was condemned by one learned man for empha-
sizing sweetness, and praised by another for being a compendium of teaching
expressed more diffusely elsewhere. Osuna concludes, “If in some book thou
readest that thou shouldst beware of persons who have raptures, as though
they had fits of frenzy, believe it not; and if they tell thee that he that wrote the
book was a holy man, say thou that no holy man is bold enough to judge and
condemn that which may be good, unless he have first examined it with great
circumspection” (E. Allison Peers, Studies of the Spanish Mystics, 2 vols., second
ed. [London: SPCK, 1951], 1.75; only the first volume of this work, originally
published in 1927, was issued in a revised edition; the second, published in
1930, was reprinted unchanged in 1960; a third volume was published posthu-
mously in 1960).
Spiritual Writers {include}: Blessed Juan de Avila, {a} secular

priest, {wrote the} treatise Audi filia et vide,618 {on} what voices to
hear and what to ignore. Luis de Granada {was} very popular in
Spain and France; {his} chief work {was} the Sinner’s Guide, {a
manual of} asceticism and meditation for lay people, {teaching
a} method of meditation, with preparation the night before (see
Pourrat III, p. 97). St. Peter of Alcántara {was a} friend of St. Teresa
{who wrote a} Treatise on Meditation. Two Franciscan masters of St.
Teresa {were} Francisco de Osuna, whom we will treat in detail,
{and} Bernardino de Laredo (d. 1540), a laybrother {and a} disciple
of Osuna, {who wrote} Ascent of Mount Sion, {with its} theme {of}
ascent above knowledge by love.
2. Francisco de Osuna619 {was} born about 1497 {and} entered
the Franciscans quite young; {he} travelled much—{to} Toulouse,
Paris, Antwerp, {and was} elected commissary general of {the}
Order {of} Friars Minor in America, but never went ({due to} ill
health); {he} died {in} 1542 (?). A writer held in high esteem in
his lifetime, {he had} twenty editions of his works {published}
while he was still alive. His Alphabets were classed with the writ-
ings of St. Teresa. {There were} six Alphabets; the Third was written
first and is the most mystical, dealing with prayer of recollection.
{The} other Alphabets {include the} First, on {the} Passion of Christ;
Second, for people in active life with little time for prayers; Fourth,
“The Law of Love,” considered by some his masterpiece; Fifth,
on poverty and riches, to help all love poverty of spirit; Sixth,
another on the Passion of Christ. {The} Third Spiritual Alphabet
{was published in} Toledo {in} 1527 “to teach all the exercises of
recollection.”620 Some of the chief topics he treats {include}:
618. Listen, Daughter, and See.

619. Merton follows Peers, Studies, 1:66-68 here.
620. Osuna says his purpose in this work is “to bring to the general notice
of all this exercise of recollection” (Third Spiritual Alphabet, Bk. 8, c. 1, quoted in
Peers, Studies, 1:68-69).
1) {The} vocation to mystical prayer: it is not for all—the un-

instructed can easily deceive themselves.621
2) Yet anyone may be called. It is not restricted only to very
holy men or for the learned. It is possible for anyone who can
love, since it is a matter of friendship with God.622
3) {It} requires effort and sacrifice, especially to purify one’s
heart and thoughts.623 One must therefore sacrifice worldliness,
from which such thoughts arise. An interesting point {is that}
created things may at times hinder our prayer, but this is not
their fault—it is due to our weakness.624 When we are more puri-
fied they no longer stand in our way.
4) In this regard he treats the question of the humanity of
Christ which St. Teresa takes up later. It was an axiom of the
Alumbrados that the humanity of Christ must be utterly for-
saken. For Osuna, it is “more perfect” to rise above it.625 For St.
Teresa one is never so perfect that he can go beyond the humanity
of Christ.626 This debate depends largely on misunderstandings,
due to the context of mental prayer. A more sacramental spiritu-
ality avoids these complications.
5) Prerequisites for interior prayer {include} meekness and
humility (see quotes {in} Peers, Studies of Spanish Mystics, p. 73627);
joy—sad souls do not progress in contemplation; love, {which}
621. Third Spiritual Alphabet, Prólogo and Bk. 8, c. 1, cited in Peers, Studies,
1:70.
622. Third Spiritual Alphabet, Bk. 1, c. 1, quoted in Peers, Studies, 1:70-71.
623. Third Spiritual Alphabet, Bk. 1, c. 2, quoted in Peers, Studies, 1:71.
625. Third Spiritual Alphabet, Prólogo, quoted in Peers, Studies, 1:72.
626. See Interior Castle, Sixth Mansions, c. 7 (The Complete Works of Saint
Teresa of Jesus, trans. and ed. E. Allison Peers, 3 vols. [New York: Sheed & Ward,
1946], 2.302-309).
627. Osuna says in chapter 4 of Book 3 that meekness is the most helpful
of the virtues for the spiritual business of which he is speaking, and that a meek
soul subjected to God leads to a meek body subjected to the soul; in Book 19 he
teaches that humility is the root of meekness and necessary for even the highest
spiritual attainment (c. 1).
is of more avail than force; patience and the avoidance of “all

superfluous care.”628 “The condition most necessary to every
spiritual exercise is to continue therein.”629
Recogimento—As Peers points out,630 Osuna has more to say
about this than all the rest of the mystical life put together. {It
is} characteristic of Spanish mysticism. What it is: it is “mystical
theology” as opposed to “speculative theology”; it is wisdom,
the “art of love”;631 in Book XXI he quotes his sources: Augus-
tine, Bonaventure (Balma?), Gregory, Dionysius, Richard of St.
Victor; the {idea of the} “path of negation” {is} strongly influ-
enced by Gerson.632 {It} is union of wills, in which man becomes
one spirit with God by an exchange of wills (compare the Cistercian
tradition, especially William of St. Thierry633). Read {the} quote
given by Peers (bottom of p. 76, 77634)—note the ecclesiological
implications, which were certainly not lost on St. Teresa: recol-
lection {is} the gathering together of that which was dispersed.
In the quote given by Peers on p. 78 (bottom), note the “deepest
recollection” is like a “crystal” filled with the “divine bright-

630. Peers, Studies, 1:76.
632. See Peers, Studies, 1:87, 92, 102.
634. “Furthermore, it is called Union, for by means of it man draws nigh
to God, and becomes one spirit with Him by an exchange of wills, so that the
man wills naught but that which God wills, neither does God withdraw Himself
from the will of the man, but they are in everything one will, as things that are
perfectly united, which lose their own natures, and become transformed in a
third: the which comes to pass in this business, for if God and the man before
had diverse wills, now they agree in one without dissatisfaction of either. And
from this it results that the man is at unity with himself and with his fellows;
which if we all were, the multitude of the faithful would be one heart and one
soul together in the Holy Spirit . . . Who makes us to be one in love, that He
may beget us in grace and bring us all to be made one together with God” (Third
Spiritual Alphabet, Bk. 6, c. 2).
ness.”635 Note that in the context he speaks of “mansions” of the

soul636—read the classical passages of St. Teresa.637 Peers points
out638 {the} essential ambiguity of Osuna’s use of recollection:
sometimes it includes all forms of interior prayer, even the most
elementary; sometimes it is a higher form, approximating to
union. (In any case, as we are not too interested in precise “de-
grees of prayer,” this lack of clarity need not trouble us. St. Teresa
and St. John of the Cross will in any case take care of the problem
of degrees.) Sometimes it is a general and habitual recollected-
ness; sometimes it is the actual practice of contemplative prayer,
635. “There remains but the tenth manner of ‘recollecting’ [i.e. uniting]
God and the soul in one . . . which comes to pass when the Divine brightness,
as into glass or stone of crystal, is poured into the soul, sending forth like the
sun the rays of its love and grace, which penetrate the heart, when they have
been received by the highest powers of the spirit. This is followed by the most
perfect recollection, which joins and unites (recoge) God with the soul and the
soul with God” (Third Spiritual Alphabet, Bk. 6, c. 4).
636. “The ninth thing recollected is the soul with its powers . . . when
the soul is raised above itself, and entirely recollected in the highest mansion
(cenáculo) of all, . . . ” (Third Spiritual Alphabet, Bk. 6, c. 4).
637. Interior Castle, First Mansions, c. 1: “I began to think of the soul as if it
were a castle made of a single diamond or of very clear crystal, in which there
are many rooms, just as in Heaven there are many mansions. . . . Let us now
imagine that this castle, as I have said, contains many mansions, some above,
others below, others at each side; and in the centre and midst of them all is the
chiefest mansion where the most secret things pass between God and the soul.
. . . Now let us return to our beautiful and delightful castle and see how we can
enter it. I seem rather to be talking nonsense; for, if this castle is the soul, there
can clearly be no question of our entering it. For we ourselves are the castle: and
it would be absurd to tell someone to enter a room when he was in it already!
But you must understand that there are many ways of ‘being’ in a place. Many
souls remain in the outer court of the castle, which is the place occupied by the
guards; they are not interested in entering it, and have no idea what there is in
that wonderful place, or who dwells in it, or even how many rooms it has. You
will have read certain books on prayer which advise the soul to enter within
itself: and that is exactly what this means. . . . As far as I can understand, the
door of entry into this castle is prayer and meditation” (Complete Works of Saint
Teresa, 2:201-203).
638. Peers, Studies, 1:79-81.
which he suggests should occupy two hours in the day (for lay-
men).639 {The role of} director {is crucial}: N.B. the eighth Book
of the Third Alphabet deals with the necessity of a master in this
“art.”640 Read {the} quote on p. 84641—praise and thanks in
the prayer of recollection. {A} second quote on the same page
shows {the} distinction between quiet contemplation and sleep:
there is a higher and spiritual vigilance (see Peers, p. 84642
and 96643—{the} latter a defense against Quietism). {On} mystical
639. Peers, Studies, 1:81-82.

640. Peers, Studies, 1:82.
641. “Our Lord is wont to place him, after much prayer, in a state of praise,
so that his praises of Him issue from within his soul. So full is that soul of the
grace of the Lord, that grace bursts forth, is poured from the lips, and issues in
such a giving of thanks that the whole soul would fain melt away, seeing itself
in so great happiness, being so near to the Lord, and knowing itself to be so
greatly loved by Him, according to the clear witness of a conscience wrapt in the
deepest peace” (Third Spiritual Alphabet, Bk. 2, c. 2).
642. “As sleep is needful for the body, to sustain bodily life, so to the soul
of the perfect man sleep of the spirit is needful also to sustain the life of love,
which he receives from God with a quiet (quietativa) sweetness which with-
draws love from the heart, that the heart may keep vigil and the senses sleep to
every creature. And the fumes caused by this heat which rises from the graces
close not the channels of the soul, but rather widen them, that the faculties of the
soul may work and the natural faculties cease. And the more these latter cease
and are at rest, the more truly and delectably do the others work throughout the
inner man, which is sovereignly restored and strengthened in such degree that
at times he can dispense with bodily sleep, since the spiritual sleep has supplied
all his needs; or at the least one that was wont to sleep four hours is content with
a single hour, and, when he awakens, returns immediately to prayer” (Third
Spiritual Alphabet, Bk. 13, c. 4).
643. “Recollected persons in no wise count it perfection to think nothing,
for to do this would be to count those who sleep without dreaming, or men in
a swoon, as perfect. . . . If the cessation of understanding stopped at this, it
would be, not only a lack of perfection, but a loss of time which could be spent
in profitable thoughts. . . . Those who follow this path endeavour and study to
awaken a love for God. . . . (So) when the understanding has ceased its specu-
lations, the will issues with great power, producing love. . . . See, then, how
this nothingness of thought is more than it appears, and how it can in no wise
be explained what it is, for God, to Whom it is directed, transcends explanation.
silence, see {the} quote on p. 85 of Peers.644 The “cloud” and the

“tiny spark” {are} evidence of vigilance (Peers, p. 87645). {With
regard to} dryness and purification, the experience of “dread”
(see Peers, p. 92646) may be in fact pathological in some cases, and
one should consider that perhaps it proceeds from strain and
undue insistence on a special “way” to which one is not suited;
discretion of the director {is} necessary here. Note: Osuna is con-
But I tell thee that this thinking nothing is thinking all things, for we think with-
out words upon Him Who is all things through His marvelous greatness; and
the least of the benefits of this nothingness of thought in recollected persons is
a subtle and most simple attentiveness to God alone” (Third Spiritual Alphabet,
Bk. 21, c. 5).
644. “Marvellous indeed, and most worthy of praise with all wonder, is
the silence (callar) of love wherein most intimately is our understanding hushed
to rest, having found, by means of its experience, that which satisfies it greatly.
For, as we clearly see, when two that love know each by experience that the
other is present, then are both silent, and the love that unites them supplies the
lack of words” (Third Spiritual Alphabet, Bk. 21, c. 3).
645. “In these manners of recollection the understanding is never so far
silenced as to be deprived completely of its powers. For it ever retains a tiny
spark, sufficient only for those that are in this state to recognize that they have
something that is of God. . . . There come also moments and crises wherein
the understanding entirely ceases, as though the soul were without intelligence
whatsoever. But then the living spark of simplest knowledge is seen again,
which is a thing of wonder, since it is in the total cessation of the understand-
ing that the soul receives the most grace. So soon as it revives again and comes
out, as it were, from the cloud, it finds itself with this grace, but knows neither
whence nor how it has come; and having it, would fain return to its mortifica-
tion and the cessation of understanding” (Third Spiritual Alphabet, Bk. 21, c. 7).
646. “There is a thing often felt by those that practice recollection, which is
a fear most terrible, making it seem as if the soul would leave the body from very
terror. This lasts but a short time, though to many it comes with frequency, and so
affrights and deters the soul that the soul loses its peace and is filled with dread,
not knowing what will become of it. Neither words nor effort nor devotion suffice
to calm it. . . . This mighty dread comes often without any thought preceding it,
and without any sound—at times, when the soul is recollected and in great devo-
tion. This can be none other than the Devil, who comes to obstruct the soul, and
since God allows him to make his presence felt, he causes that new and sudden
terror which shakes the whole being” (Third Spiritual Alphabet, Bk. 7, c. 3).
cerned with active people who practice contemplation, especially

laymen. Hence his book is an excellent introduction to the subject.
He is as meticulous as a Yogi in his prescriptions on food, sleep,
postures, washing, reading, etc.647 In brief, he summarizes the tradi-
tion of medieval and Rhenish mystics and transmits it to Spain.
3. The Carmelite School: the great Carmelites, St. Teresa
and St. John of the Cross in particular, are very well known and
there is no need to make a detailed study of their mysticism here.
St. Teresa is very widely read and is one of the most attractive of
the mystics by reason of her human qualities, her frankness,
simplicity, energy, humor and good sense. It will suffice to outline
the Carmelite, especially the Teresian, doctrine on prayer, and then
treat in more detail one or two special practical problems.
The Teresian School of Prayer (as in the case of the Thomists
and St. Thomas, we must distinguish the followers of St. Teresa
from St. Teresa herself): more than any other school, {this one}
analyzes the experience of contemplation and of union with God.
The approach is essentially practical. Stress is placed on “how to
get” to union with God, in cooperation with His grace, {as well
as on} how to avoid obstacles {and} what the director should do
to help one avoid obstacles and progress rapidly. For instance,
note the summary on the first page of The Ascent of Mount Carmel,
which describes the teaching of the book as follows: “Treats of
how the soul may prepare itself to attain in a short time to Divine
union. Gives very profitable counsels and instruction, both to
beginners and proficients, that they may know how to disencum-
ber themselves of all that is temporal and not encumber themselves with
the spiritual, and to remain in complete detachment and liberty of
spirit, as is necessary for Divine union” (vol. 1, p. 9).648
The Carmelite reform itself aimed at providing austere, rec-
ollected convents in which one could rapidly progress in prayer.
As to the reception of postulants, St. Teresa says: “Let great care
647. See Peers, Studies, 1:97-98.

648. Text reads “. . . itself in order to attain . . . not to encumber . . . ”; the
entire passage is italicized in the text.
be taken that those who are to be received be persons of prayer

whose aim is complete perfection and contempt of the world”
(Constitutions, vol. III, p. 224—Read context649). The novice mis-
tress is to receive from the novices a daily account of the progress
they are making in prayer and how they are proceeding in it (Const.
p. 230—Read context650). All the sisters must report to the prioress
once a month “what progress they have made in prayer and the
way in which Our Lord is leading them” (id.). Everything that
St. Teresa says about spiritual direction, and indeed about the
spiritual life, must be understood in this light. It is written ex-
plicitly for nuns whose whole profession is to be persons of
prayer, and this means primarily of mental prayer. The same is
even more true of St. John of the Cross. St. Teresa’s whole purpose
in founding St. Joseph’s Convent, and getting away from the
large Convent of the Incarnation where the mitigated observance
was in force, was to return to the Primitive Rule of Carmel. The
purpose of the Primitive Rule is to permit constant prayer in si-
lence and solitude. Chapter 5 of the Rule of St. Albert (twelfth
century) reads: “Let each one remain alone in his cell or near it,
meditating day and night on the Law of the Lord and watching
649, This is the first sentence of the section “Of the Receiving of Novices,”
which goes on to specify that prospective sisters should be at least seventeen,
detached from the world, healthy, intelligent, and possessed of the right tem-
perament and qualities to live the Carmelite life; acceptance must not be predi-
cated on whether the one entering gives alms to the house, or “we shall be pay-
ing more attention to the amount of a person’s alms than to her goodness and
other qualities” (225); the majority of the community must approve of a new
novice being received, as well as of each sister making profession.
650. The paragraph on the duties of the novice mistress is part of the sec-
tion “Of the Obligations of each Nun in her Office” (228–30); it emphasizes that
the novice mistress should be “a person of great prudence, prayer and spiritual-
ity,” who teaches her charges both the outward regulations of the Constitutions
and the inward practices of prayer and mortification, attaching more impor-
tance to the latter than to the former; she should “treat them compassionately
and lovingly, not marveling at their faults, for their progress is bound to be
gradual,” and should “attach more importance to their not failing in the virtues
than to strictness of penance.”
in prayer, unless he is legitimately occupied in something else.”651

St. Teresa interprets this in her own way (see Way of Perfection, c.
4) {focusing on} silence and solitude in the cell. They work alone:
“There must be no work-room at St. Joseph’s; for, although it is
a praiseworthy custom to have one, it is easier to keep silence if
one is alone, and getting used to solitude is a great help to prayer.
Since prayer must be the foundation on which this house is built, it is
necessary for us to like whatever gives us the greatest help in it”
(vol. II, p. 18{-19}).652 Elsewhere (Interior Castle, V:1, page 247) she
says: “All of us who wear the sacred habit of Carmel are called
to prayer and contemplation—because that was the first principle
of our Order and because we are descended from the line of those
holy Fathers of ours from Mount Carmel who sought this trea-
sure, {. . .} in such solitude and with such contempt for the
world. . . . ”653 St. Teresa was also very conscious of the apostolic
effect of Carmelite prayer: her convents were an integral part of
the Counter-reformation. In The Way of Perfection (c. 1) she tells
her nuns that their vocation is to pray for the salvation of souls,
and especially {those} of the Lutherans.654 In the Life (c. 32) she
tells how the inspiration to found the first discalced convent fol-
lowed visions of hell which made her realize her own imperfec-
tion and remissness. She was particularly distressed by the fact
that she was constantly out of the convent with people of the
world, important personages, who could persuade her superiors
to send her out to them. It was in a conversation with her cousin
Maria de Ocampo that the project of foundation first came up.
Then a vision confirmed the project. Her confessor approved it,
and her superiors went along with it. But it met with great per-
secution and opposition and Maria de Ocampo’s confessor even
651. Les Plus Vieux Textes du Carmel, ed. and trans. François de Sainte-Marie,
ocd (Paris: Éditions du Seuil, 1944), 88.
652. Text reads “. . . learn to like . . . ” (emphasis Merton’s).
653. Text reads “. . . this sacred habit . . . treasure, this precious pearl of
which we speak, in such great solitude . . . ”
654. Complete Works of Saint Teresa, 2.3.
refused her absolution. Then the provincial changed his mind.

(Read Life, pages 219 ff.655)
Carmelite theologians, typified by Joseph of the Holy Spirit
{in his} Cursus Theologiae Mystico-Scholasticae,656 develop the Tere-
sian program. He states: “While all who aspire to perfection
should also desire mystical union, the Carmelites are to under-
stand this call particularly directed to them, and not be deterred
by the difficulties” (Isagoge, I.iv.2).657 In II, Disp. 11, Q. 4, Joseph
of the Holy Spirit considers the question “whether there are some
who are bound to contemplation.”658 He holds that Carmelites are
obligated by their profession to seek perfection by the way of con-
templation. In order to sustain this opinion he necessarily has to
adopt the view that there is such a thing as acquired contempla-
tion, as no one could be bound to attain to perfection by infused
contemplation. “Finis immediatus nostrae sacrae religionis est
655. Merton has summarized these pages in the preceding sentences; the
chapter goes on to relate that a learned Dominican was consulted, and Teresa
agreed to abide by his decision; though he initially intended to urge her to give
up the project, and was encouraged to do so by others, he finally “became con-
vinced that we should be rendering God a great service and that the scheme
must not be abandoned” (1.222-23), and subsequently several saintly persons
initially opposed to the idea of the new foundation began to support it.
656. Ioseph a Spiritu Sancto, Cursus Theologiae Mystico-Scholasticae, ed. An-
astasio a S. Paulo, 6 vols. (Bruges: Beyaert, 1924–1934) (originally published in
Seville/Madrid, 1720–1740).
657. This is a paraphrase; the text (#168) reads: “Omnibus huic sacratissimae
unioni inhiandum est et praecipue iis, quorum est in perfectionem ire et die ac nocte in
orationibus vigilare. Quamobrem, carissimi, estote fortes in bello et pugnate vigiles
cum antiqua serpente . . . suae invidiae ab hac felicitate retrahere sollicitante. Nec vos
deterreat asperum certamen, quod aggredimini; sed introspicite fastigium, in quod
vocamini” (1.54). (“This most sacred union should be desired by all, and especially
by those who are called to perfection and to remain awake in prayer day and
night. Therefore, dearest ones, be courageous in this struggle and fight alertly
with the ancient serpent . . . who endeavors to draw you away from this happi
ness out of envy. Do not let yourselves be frightened away by this bitter struggle
which you are waging; but set your sights on the summit to which you are
called.”)
658. Cursus, 2.525–76.
contemplatio.”659 He quotes Thomas of Jesus who states that the

Carmelite seeks the perfection of charity above all “by continual
meditation and prayer, which is his immediate end, and then by
enclosure in the cell, manual labor, most strict abstinence and
silence, as means destined to this end.”660 (This sounds like Cas-
sian, Conference 1.661) Joseph concludes that a Carmelite who
would frequently omit “purely mental prayer” ({as} distinct from
{the} office) would go against the very purpose of his religious
life and hence would sin mortally.662 How does this compare with
the Benedictine concept of conversatio morum? It is certainly too
formal a statement. The monastic spirit is less juridical, and less
centered on one means.
The Classical Carmelite Treatment of Prayer and Contemplation:
here we give a brief schema of the levels of prayer according to
the Carmelite school. This schema is more artificial than the writ-
ings of St. Teresa herself.
1. Pre-Contemplation (this term, suggested by Fr. Gabriel
of St. Mary Magdalen,663 is perhaps arbitrary):
659. Cursus, 2.541 (#117): “The immediate end of our sacred religious life
is contemplation.”
660. Cursus, 2.546 (#124), quoting Thomas of Jesus, Expositio in Regulam
Ordinis Carmelitarum, II, dub. 1 (Opera Omnia [1684], I, 451B).
661. In the first Conference, Abbot Moses distinguishes between the scopos,
or immediate purpose of the monastic life, which is purity of heart, and the telos,
or final goal, which is the Kingdom of God (PL 49, cols. 483–85; see Cassian and
the Fathers, 204–206).
662. Almost the entire rest of Quaestio IV (2.543–72; ##145–72) is taken up
with defending this proposition and refuting objections to it.
663. This term is not found in Fr. Gabriel’s series of lectures: École Thérési-
enne et Problèmes Mystiques Contemporains (Paris: Desclée, de Brouwer, 1935);
Sainte Thérèse: Maîtresse de Vie Spirituelle (Paris: Desclée, de Brouwer, 1938) (ET:
St. Teresa of Jesus [Westminster, MD: Newman Press, 1949]); Saint Jean de la Croix,
Docteur de l’Amour Divin (Paris: Desclée, de Brouwer, 1947) (ET: St. John of the
Cross: Doctor of Divine Love and Contemplation [Westminster, MD: Newman Press,
1946]); La Contemplation “Acquise” (Paris: Lethielleux, 1949) (ET included in St. John
of the Cross, 99ff.); nor is it found in his contribution to the article “Contempla-
tion” in the Dictionnaire de Spiritualité: “Contemplation dans l’École du Carmel
1) Meditation (discursive): a simple method was in favor in

the novitiates, {with} emphasis on affectivity rather than reason-
ing. Meditation in its discursive form is not insisted on with too
much rigidity. The Carmelites readily accept the fact that medi-
tation in a formal sense may become impossible. St. Teresa says:
“Not all can meditate but all can love.”664 Her corollary is that
one should seek above all to progress in love rather than in medi-
tation. Note what she says on “loving much rather than thinking
much,” and not paying too much attention to distractions (Interior
Castle, IV.l; p. 233).665
2) Prayer of recollection:
i) active: {this entails} conscious and willed diminution of
discursive acts—deliberate simplification.
ii) passive: discourse is further diminished by {the} interven-
tion of actual grace, but not entirely eliminated.
({Note:} this distinction is rather the work of modern followers of
St. Teresa than of the saint herself.) {For} examples, {see} Interior
Castle, IV.3;666 Life, 12:13.667 (Here St. John of the Cross insists on
Thérèsienne” (DS 2, cols. 2058–67); in his article on “Carmes: Dechaussés” he

speaks of preparation for contemplation but not “pre-contemplation” (DS 2,
cols. 181–82).
664. See Foundations, c. 5: “not everyone has by nature an imagination
capable of meditating, whereas all souls are capable of love” (Complete Works of
Saint Teresa, 3.19).
665. “I only want you to be warned that, if you would progress a long way
on this road and ascend to the Mansions of your desire, the important thing is
not to think much, but to love much” (Complete Works of Saint Teresa, 2.233).
666. Complete Works of Saint Teresa, 2.240-46: this chapter is entitled “De-
scribes what is meant by the Prayer of Recollection, which the Lord generally grants
before that already mentioned. Speaks of its effects and of the remaining effects of the
former kind of prayer, which had to do with the consolations given by the Lord”; it em-
phasizes not straining after spiritual advancement but being receptive to divine
action: “The soul must just leave itself in the hands of God, and do what He
wills it to do, completely disregarding its own advantage and resigning itself as
much as it possibly can to the will of God” (242–43).
667. Chapter 12 has only 7 sections (which in any case are not numbered in
the Peers translation); perhaps Merton has mistranscribed from another source
the night of sense [{to be} discussed later] {with its} preliminary
passive purification of the senses.668) This pre-contemplative level
is not mystical or infused contemplation; at least such seems to
be the general opinion. Those who hold the existence of acquired
contemplation are actually calling by that name the prayer of recol-
lection. This prayer is simple (sometimes called669 prayer of
“simple regard”670 or “prayer of simplicity”671), a plain, unde-
tailed intuition, a global view, generally informed with affectivity:
a “gaze of love.” Note that many consider that the Night of Sense
is already the beginning of mystical action of God in the soul.
Such fine distinctions are however not to be taken too seriously,
and one must not attempt to “measure” everything in the spiritual
life. Nor is it the intention of the Carmelite saints that we should
attempt any such thing.
2. Contemplation:
a) The prayer of quiet (Fourth, Fifth Mansion) {is} like the
prayer of passive recollection but deeper and more passive. (Note,
for discussion of this rather fine distinction, see remarks that follow
the schema.672) In the prayer of quiet there is still {the} possibility
of distraction. There is still some cooperation on the part of the
largely passive faculties. Passivity grows. The intelligence and will
have less and less part to play as one approaches the next degree.
a reference to chapter 12, sections 1–3, which focus on the soul’s own activity in
awakening love and nurturing virtues; in the sections of the chapter that follow
Teresa warns the reader not to attempt to suspend the working of the under-
standing by one’s own efforts (Complete Works of Saint Teresa, 1.70–73).
668. St. John discusses the passive night of sense in The Dark Night of the
Soul, cc. 8–14 (Complete Works of Saint John of the Cross, 1.371-97).
669. The terms are found together in Pourrat, 3.196.
670. See Poulain, c. 2: “Of the Four Degrees of Ordinary Prayer and of the
Last Two in Particular” (7–51); the fourth degree is “the prayer of simple regard or of
simplicity” (7), which Poulain considers the highest stage of non-mystical prayer.
671. According to Tanquerey, who describes it at some length (637–48),
this term was first used by Bossuet in Manière Court et Facile pour Faire l’Oraison
en Foi, et de Simple Présence de Dieu (637); see also Poulain, 10.
672. See below, pages 245–46.
b) The prayer of full union (Fifth Mansion: see Interior Castle,

Fifth Mansion): here passivity is complete. There is no further
ability to act and direct oneself, or to take any initiative, or to co-
operate with grace on one’s own. One is passively moved, and
“out of oneself.”
c) This growing passivity manifests itself in two further ways
(Sixth Mansion):
1) positive: ecstasy, rapture and other ways in which the soul
is “seized” and “carried away” by the love of God673 (to be dis-
tinguished from the “consolations” described early in {the} Fourth
Mansion674);
2) negative: exterior and interior trials of all sorts, especially
great anguish concerning the validity and divine character of
graces that have been received.
(Here distinguish the approach of St. John of the Cross in The
Dark Night of the Soul, and that of St. Teresa in the Sixth Mansion.
St. John of the Cross concentrates on passive and mystical puri-
fication by night and desolation, within the depths of the soul.
St. Teresa reflects more her own experience: interior and exterior
trials combined, the doubt cast upon her spiritual experiences
by confessors and good people, and the consequent conflict
within her own soul which could not but follow the action of
God in spite of all that was said and done to discourage her.)
d) Transforming union, or mystical marriage, preceded by
spiritual betrothal (Seventh Mansion):
A. Spiritual betrothal (VII.1):
1) An experience of the Trinity beyond vision—here we re-
join the theologia of the Greek Fathers and Evagrius (read p. 331,
bottom675).
673. See Sixth Mansions, cc. 4-5 (Complete Works of Saint Teresa, 2.286-97).
674. See Fourth Mansions, cc. 1-2 (Complete Works of Saint Teresa, 2.230-39).
675. “It is brought into this Mansion by means of an intellectual vision, in
which, by a representation of the truth in a particular way, the Most Holy Trinity
reveals itself, in all three Persons. First of all the spirit becomes enkindled and
2) It is not an ecstatic experience {and} does not impede

contact with external reality. The presence of the Blessed Trinity
is more or less constantly conscious. “The soul is always aware
that it is experiencing this companionship.”676
B. Spiritual marriage:
1) Takes place in the inmost center of the soul. She mentions in
her own case an “imaginary vision” of Christ, but this is accidental.677
He appears in the center of the soul in an “intellectual vision.”678
2) The soul and God can no longer be separated. “The soul
remains all the time in that center with its God.”679 Yet this does
not mean it has attained a state of impeccability, nor are pain,
suffering and trial excluded, though they cannot penetrate to this
center of the soul. But “they have no aridities or interior trials”
(p. 340). “There are hardly any of the periods of aridity or interior
disturbance which at one time or another have occurred in all
[the other mansions], but the soul is almost always in tranquillity”
(note {the} qualifiers) (p. 34l).680 “They have no lack of crosses,
but these do not unsettle them or deprive them of their peace”
(343).
3) The effects {include}: (a) self-forgetfulness; (b) {a} great
desire to suffer, interior joy, love of enemies, desire for the glory
is illumined, as it were, by a cloud of the greatest brightness. It sees these three

persons, individually, and yet, by a wonderful kind of knowledge which is given
to it, the soul realizes that most certainly and truly all these three Persons are one
Substance and one Power and one Knowledge and one God alone; so that what
we hold by faith the soul may be said here to grasp by sight, although nothing is
seen by the eyes, either of the body or of the soul, for it is no imaginary vision. Here
all three Persons communicate Themselves to the soul and speak to the soul and
explain to it those words which the Gospel attributes to the Lord—namely, that He
and the Father and the Holy Spirit will come to dwell with the soul which loves
Him and keeps His commandments” (Complete Works of Saint Teresa, 2.331-32).
676. Complete Works of Saint Teresa, 2.332 (emphasis added).
677. Interior Castle, VII.2 (Complete Works of Saint Teresa, 2.334).
680. Text reads “. . . disturbance in it which . . . ” (emphasis added).
of God above all; (c) no more raptures and transports, no more

fears; (d) deep interior silence.
Some remarks:
A. The Nature of Contemplation: the Teresian theolo-
gians then tend to separate the prayer of passive recollection,
which belongs to what they call “pre-contemplation,” from the
prayer of quiet which is the first stage of real contemplation. In
making this distinction they also place the dividing line between
so-called acquired contemplation and infused contemplation at
this point, which is not too clearly defined. Is this distinction clear
in St. Teresa herself? Certainly not as clear as her followers seem
to think. Without taking the academic divisions too seriously, let
us consider the texts of St. Teresa herself. {In the} Fourth Mansion
(Interior Castle, vol. ii; p. 230), she declares that here the “super-
natural” prayer begins. Hence she seems to mean that here what
is commonly called infused contemplation begins. Does the “su-
pernatural” here apply to the “consolations” which she describes,
or to the prayer of recollection which comes in the same book?
In IV.3 she makes it clear that “this form of recollection also seems
to me to be supernatural” (p. 240).681 She identifies “consolations”
in this context with {the} prayer of quiet (see IV.2; p. 236). Both
then are “supernatural.” Note in IV.1 and 2 there is an added
element of confusion: (1) she is comparing “consolations” (prayer
of quiet) with “sweetness” (acquired by meditation);682 (2) and she
is also implicitly leading up to a comparison between {the} prayer
of quiet and prayer of recollection. The danger is that we may
confuse these and identify either “consolations” or “sweetness”
with {the} prayer of recollection—then we are lost.
Comment: with all these divisions and distinctions, comings
and goings and varieties of terms, one tends to become impatient
681. Text reads “It is a form of recollection which also seems to me super-
natural, . . . ”
with the saint. (Walter Hilton, in the Scale of Perfection [v.g. II.27683],
is much simpler and more satisfying.) Read pp. 240 and 241, {her}
description of “prayer of recollection.”684 She uses the celebrated
683. This chapter, entitled “How it is very profitable for a soul to be

brought by grace into the luminous darkness, and how a man should dispose
himself to come to it,” discusses the experience of darkness first as a mode of
self-knowledge, then as a spiritual seeing of Jesus; the author emphasizes that
it is necessary for those without the experience to prepare themselves for it by
dying to the world and its recognition, by being poor inwardly and if possible
outwardly as well, by not resting in one’s own deeds or virtues and by bearing
no ill will toward one’s fellow-Christians; darkness is equated with dying to the
world, as Paul teaches in Gal. 6:15—it is the one and only gateway to contem-
plation, which is equated with the gain of one-hundred-fold given to those who
forsake the world; darkness is compared to coming out of the sunlight into a
darkened room and having to refocus one’s eyes (see Walter Hilton, The Scale of
Perfection, trans. Dom Gerard Sitwell, osb [London: Burns Oates, 1953], 215–21);
while the reference is to chapter 27, it is possible that Merton is actually thinking
of the following chapter, which discusses the work of the Lord in reforming the
soul in terms of the four-fold activity of calling, justifying, magnifying and glo-
rifying, which is perhaps more pertinent to the discussion of stages of growth
in St. Teresa here.
684. “It is sometimes said that the soul enters within itself and sometimes
that it rises above itself; but I cannot explain things in that kind of language, for
I have no skill in it. However, I believe you will understand what I am able to
tell you, though I may perhaps be intelligible only to myself. Let us suppose that
these senses and faculties (the inhabitants, as I have said, of this castle, which is
the figure that I have taken to explain my meaning) have gone out of the castle,
and, for days and years, have been consorting with strangers, to whom all the
good things in the castle are abhorrent. Then, realizing how much they have
lost, they come back to it, though they do not actually re-enter it, because the
habits they have formed are hard to conquer. But they are no longer traitors and
they now walk about in the vicinity of the castle. The great King, Who dwells in
the Mansion within this castle, perceives their good will, and in His great mercy
desires to bring them back to Him. So, like a good Shepherd, with a call so
gentle that even they can hardly recognize it, he teaches them to know His voice
and not to go away and get lost but to return to their Mansion; and so powerful
is this Shepherd’s call that they give up the things outside the castle which had
led them astray, and once again enter it. I do not think I have ever explained this
before as clearly as here. When we are seeking God within ourselves . . . it is a
great help if God grants us this favour. Do not suppose that the understanding
image of the Lord like a hidden shepherd in the center of the soul
calling together the faculties like sheep to Himself in recollection,
“with a call so gentle that even they can hardly recognize it.”
This in our opinion puts the prayer of passive recollection in the
class of infused contemplation. {See also} Life, chapter 12: here
she seems to rule out a prayer of active recollection that would
consist in deliberately suspending the activity of the faculties.
But {she} describes how {in} passive recollection, brought about
by grace, and aided by humility and learning (she keeps insisting
that the humble and learned man is at an advantage here), God
Himself provides the faculties, passively, with occupation, or else
fills the soul with His presence. It is not a mere blank. (Read
pp. 71, 72, 73.685) Again, {in the} Fourth Mansion (p. 243), this is
can attain to Him, merely by trying to think of Him as within the soul, or the
imagination, by picturing Him as there. This is a good habit and an excellent
kind of meditation, for it is founded upon a truth—namely, that God is within
us. But it is not the kind of prayer that I have in mind, for anyone (with the help
of the Lord, you understand) can practice it for himself. What I am describing is
quite different. These people are sometimes in the castle before they have begun
to think about God at all. I cannot say where they entered it or how they heard
their Shepherd’s call: it was certainly not with their ears, for outwardly such a
call is not audible. They become markedly conscious that they are gradually
retiring within themselves; anyone who experiences this will discover what I
mean: I cannot explain it better.”
685. “If anyone tries to pass beyond this stage and lift up his spirit so as
to experience consolations which are not being given to him, I think he is losing
both in the one respect and in the other. For these consolations are supernatural
and, when the understanding ceases to act, the soul remains barren and suffers
great aridity. And, as the foundation of the entire edifice is humility, the nearer
we come to God, the greater must be the progress which we make in this virtue:
otherwise, we lose everything. It seems to be a kind of pride that makes us wish
to rise higher, for God is already doing more for us than we deserve by bring-
ing us near to Him. . . . In the mystical theology which I began to describe, the
understanding loses its power of working, because God suspends it . . . . What
I say we must not do is to presume to think that we can suspend it ourselves;
nor must we allow it to cease working: if we do, we shall remain stupid and
cold and shall achieve nothing whatsoever. . . . Once more I repeat my advice
that it is very important that we should not try to lift up our spirits unless they
further qualified. We should not suspend all thought. We should

without forcing or turmoil put an end to discursive reasoning. One
should retain a general sense of the presence of God, a global
awareness. But one should not try to understand what is going
on or try to understand what this state is because that is a gift
bestowed upon the will. This is a very clear and important quali-
fication. It gives us a good and perfectly traditional idea of con-
templation, and of the way to dispose oneself to receive the gift
of contemplation, the way to cooperate with that gift in its more
tenuous and preliminary stage. Above all it makes clear that
we are not to think about ourselves and about what is
going on in ourselves. This is forgotten by superficial readers
of the Carmelite mystics who, on the contrary, become preoccu-
pied with themselves and with their state. If the Carmelites define
and describe these states, it is only to remind us at the same time
that we must forget all states and all ways. Certain minds can
never grasp this approach. For such, the Carmelite mystics are
harmful reading. A too rapid reading of Fourth Mansion chapter
3 may lead to confusion rather than clarification as to the difference
between prayer of recollection and prayer of quiet. Why? because
she takes the prayer of recollection now after the prayer of quiet.
{See} Life, 14 (the second water): {the} prayer of quiet “borders
on the supernatural, to which [the soul] could in no way attain
by its own exertions” (p. 83). “The faculties are not lost . . . . The
will alone is occupied in such a way that, without knowing how,
it becomes captive. . . . ”686 The other faculties can help the will
but more often hinder it (the “doves”) (p. 84). {There are} great
consolation and little labor, {and} great fruits of virtue, a “pres-
ence” of the Lord, which indicates that He is “about to begin a
special work.”687 But the soul that is alone and afraid can become
very confused and can turn back. {It is} difficult to understand
are lifted up by the Lord: in the latter case we shall become aware of the fact
instantly.”
the situation, and more difficult to explain it. What has been said
is by no means complete, but the fragments of ideas should en-
able us to piece together a fairly accurate idea of what St. Teresa
means by contemplative prayer.
We can come to the following conclusions, without going
into further detail:
1) Here we have purely and simply the traditional contem-
platio of the medieval monastic tradition. It is also familiar mysti-
cal prayer as found everywhere in the Rhenish and Flemish
mystics.
2) St. Teresa, writing without plan and without system, re-
peatedly approaches the subject from the point of view of experi-
ence and from different angles. She brings out ever-new aspects
and shades of meaning in simple contemplative experience, and
she does tend to distinguish a prayer of recollection, and a deeper
form of (almost) the same thing which is the prayer of quiet.
3) The love of order and system among the Carmelite theo-
logians of the Teresian school has led to a systematic schema, a
clear-cut division of these various “degrees.” But actually this
clear-cut division, requiring great ingenuity, is never quite satis-
factory, and never quite hits the real point. Whatever may be the
merits of the various classifications, since St. Teresa speaks of the
prayer of passive recollection as “supernatural”688 and describes
it as a response to the felt, experienced call direct from God, it
certainly seems to be infused contemplation and not “pre-contem-
plation.” However the modern Carmelites single this out as a
special intermediate form of prayer: (a) they call it “active” or
“acquired” contemplation; (b) they claim that it calls for a special
kind of direction; (c) it is a question of teaching and helping the
soul to prepare himself to dispose himself in simplicity for the grace
of recollection and unification of the faculties in the love of
God.
688. See Interior Castle, IV.3 (Complete Works of Saint Teresa, 2.240): “It is a
form of recollection which also seems to me supernatural . . . . ”
4) We can never be absolutely and precisely sure what St.

Teresa meant, and how she intended to distinguish the prayer of
quiet from the prayer of (passive) recollection. The best thing is
to read what she has said about both, and accept it all as it stands,
making use of the intuitions her descriptions suggest for our own
practical purposes.
5) In doing this we will be returning, more or less, to the
traditional idea of contemplatio which was never reduced to per-
fect systematization by the monastic fathers, and at the same time
we will be profiting by the observations and experience of St.
Teresa. In a word, it is very profitable for us to read and under-
stand St. Teresa in the light of the medieval monastic tradition
and of the Rhenish mystics. But it is less profitable to introduce
into our monastic theology the systematic psychological distinc-
tions favored by more modern writers.
B. The Call to Contemplation: this has been a question
which has preoccupied modern writers in mystical theology.
What does St. Teresa have to say about it? It is obviously of pri-
mary concern to her.
Who is called to (mystical) contemplation?
1. First of all, remember the context: she is writing for mem-
bers of an order in which everything is directly ordered to a life
of recollection, of meditative prayer, of contemplation and con-
templative union with God. This, as we have seen, is the express
purpose of the Carmelite life. Those then who are called to the
Carmelite life are without question called to tend to contemplation.
They are called to do whatever they can to dispose themselves
for it. They are called to the “contemplative life” in the juridical
sense, and more than that they are called to the contemplative life
in an interior and active sense: that is, to the practice of detach-
ment, silence, solitude, recollection and meditation, which will
dispose them to receive the gift of true contemplative prayer.
2. Speaking in this context to her sisters (Way of Perfection, c.
19; p. 85), she says that they are all called to the “living waters”
of contemplative experience. This text has even been interpreted
to mean that all Christians are called to mystical prayer in a remote
way. She says: “Remember, the Lord invites us all [i.e. Car-
melites?]; and, since He is Truth Itself, we cannot doubt Him. If
His invitation were not a general one, He would not have said:
‘I will give you to drink.’ He might have said: ‘Come all of you,
for after all you will lose nothing by coming; and I will give to
drink to those whom I think fit for it.’ But, as He said we were
all to come, without making this condition, I feel sure that none
will fail to receive this living water unless they cannot keep to
the path.”689
Comments:
a) As the text seems to refer to John 7:37, it can be taken to
apply to all Christians.
b) St. Teresa was a concrete thinker. When she says “we” it
is much more likely that she has in mind those who are actually
present or those who belong to the group to which she speaks,
even if not all are actually present.
c) What does she mean about those “who cannot keep to the
path”? At any rate it is a qualification which admits that though
all may be called in some way, all may not be able to answer the
call and turn out, in effect, to be not called. (It is not at all clear
whether they culpably reject the call.)
3. What is this way? In chapter 28 of The Way of Perfection (p.
115), she indicates that those who are able to practice the prayer of
recollection will receive “the water of the fountain” which, in
context, is mystical (“supernatural” prayer). She says explicitly
that the prayer of recollection is the quickest way to the prayer
of quiet. What she means precisely by prayer of recollection here
is a prayer which even though vocal is centered upon an awareness
of the presence of God within oneself. “It is called recollection because
the soul collects together all the faculties and enters within itself
to be with its God. Its Divine Master comes more speedily to
teach it, and grant it the Prayer of Quiet, than in any other way.”690
689. Text reads “. . . ‘. . . I will give drink to those . . .’ . . . ” (emphasis
added).
“Those who are able to shut themselves up in this way in the

little Heaven of the soul, wherein dwells the Maker of Heaven
and earth, and who have formed the habit of looking at nothing
and staying in no place which will distract these outward senses,
may be sure that they are walking on an excellent road, and will
come without fail to drink of the water. . . . ”691 It is clearly im-
plied that some are not able to do this. Hence we can conclude
that those who are able to practice the prayer of recollection are
certainly (according to her) called to higher prayer, at least to the
beginning of mystical contemplation. She does not assert they
are the only ones so called. It certainly does not seem to be an
exaggerated claim to say that all the carefully picked members
of a small Carmelite community, picked precisely in view of this
kind of aptitude, might be said to be called to mystical contem-
plation at least in its most elementary form. What does this mean?
It does not mean that all Carmelites will automatically reach
mystical prayer, by the mere fact of keeping their Rule faithfully.
But it does mean that mystical prayer should be considered or-
dinary and normal, not only in Carmel and other similar Orders,
but everywhere where a certain amount of silence and recollec-
tion are possible, where there is an atmosphere of faith, and
where it is not too difficult for the ordinary Christian to be fully
aware of the truths of his faith, especially of the presence of God
and the love of Christ crucified.
4. Nevertheless, St. Teresa admits in practice:

a) the perfect are not necessarily mystics in the sense of at-
taining to the grace of the prayer of union or even of the prayer of
quiet;
b) even in Carmel, though mystical prayer should be ordi-
nary and the nuns all dispose themselves to a life of deep union
with God, not every Carmelite will attain to mystical prayer in
actual fact;
691. Text reads “. . . within this little . . . ” (Complete Works of Saint Teresa,
2.115).
c) even if one does not attain to mystical prayer, in Carmel

or elsewhere, he can be just as holy and perhaps more holy than
one who has attained to this prayer.
The cardinal text on this is Interior Castle, V, c. 3, which points out
that the essence of Christian perfection is union with God by
love, that is to say, perfect union with His will, and that an ex-
perience of union in prayer is not essential to Christian sanctity.
Despite all I have said, this Mansion seems to me a little

obscure. There is a great deal to be gained by entering it,
and those from whom the Lord withholds such super-
natural gifts will do well to feel that they are not without
hope; for true union can quite well be achieved, with the
favour of Our Lord, if we endeavour to attain it by not
following our own will but submitting it to whatever is
the will of God. Oh, how many of us there are who say
we do this and think we want nothing else, and would die
for the truth, as I believe I have said! For I tell you, and I
shall often repeat this, that when you have obtained this
favour from the Lord, you need not strive for that other
delectable union which has been described, for the most
valuable thing about it is that it proceeds from this union
which I am now describing; and we cannot attain to the
heights I have spoken of if we are not sure that we have
the union in which we resign our wills to the will of God.
Oh, how much to be desired is this union! Happy the soul
that has attained to it, for it will live peacefully both in this
life and in the next as well. Nothing that happens on earth
will afflict it unless it finds itself in peril of losing God, or
sees that He is offended—neither sickness nor poverty nor
death, except when someone dies who was needed by the
Church of God. For this soul sees clearly that He knows
what He does better than it knows itself what it desires
(Peers trans., pp. 259–260).692
692. Text reads “ . . . die for this truth, . . . ”

Here she is describing the union of wills which is essential to

Christian perfection. This is the union of love in which the ex-
perience of the prayer of union is rooted and founded. Hence we
can say, without the prayer of union, the experience of union,
one can still be deeply and perfectly united to God. But without
union of wills in love the prayer and mystical experience of union
cannot be genuine.
Theologians have developed this in the following terms:
a) Distinction is to be made between integral and substantial
perfection: substantial perfection {entails} union of wills with God
by love; integral perfection {entails} union of wills plus an experi-
ence of that union in mystical prayer.
b) Integral perfection is or should be the normal sanctity of
the Christian. It is less according to the Gospels for one to be
united perfectly to Christ without having any experience what-
ever of the fact. (See St. John 14:17 etc., quoted above at the begin-
ning of this series of lectures.693)
c) It is possible for one to have greater substantial perfection,
without experience, than one who has the integral perfection that
includes prayer of union. In other words it is possible to be more
of a saint and yet less of a mystic or not a mystic at all in the sense
of having mystical prayer. (Maritain insists694 that there is an

694. See Maritain’s essay “Action and Contemplation” in Jacques Mari
tain, Scholasticism and Politics, trans. Mortimer J. Adler (New York: Macmillan,
1940): “In the case of other souls it will be primarily the other gifts of inspired
freedom; their life will indeed by a mystical and dispropriated life; but it will
be such pre-eminently in relation to their activities and works, and they will
not have the typical and normal forms of contemplation. They will not be, for
all that, deprived of contemplation, of participating and experiencing lovingly
the divine states. . . . The contemplation of the ‘active’ souls will be masked and
inapparent, but they will have contemplative graces . . . . Mysterious contem-
plation will not be in their way of praying but in the grace of their behaviour, in
their sweet-minded hands, perhaps, or in their way of walking perhaps, or in
their way of looking at a poor man or at suffering” (186–87). In a February 10,
1949 letter to Maritain, Merton thanks him for his “kind remarks” on Merton’s
“active” mysticism which covers this case, so all saints are in

some sense mystics.) In any event, it is held that those who being
substantially perfect somehow have to “do without” mystical
prayer receive some form of compensation for this.
XI. The Spiritual Direction of Contemplatives

1. The Nature and History of Spiritual Direction: it has remained
for modern times to take with special seriousness the question of
the spiritual direction of contemplatives as well as of those with
special apostolic vocations, and others. Spiritual direction has
become more and more of an institution. In a course with a more
or less pastoral orientation, one cannot ignore the seriousness
with which this question is studied today. At the same time one
cannot ignore either the change in attitude which is beginning to
make itself felt. It is therefore very important to get a well-rounded
view of the whole question of spiritual direction. Instead of going
into a detailed examination of all the technical ins and outs of the
pamphlet What is Contemplation? (Holy Cross, IN: Saint Mary’s College, 1948),
and for his suggestion that those Merton refers to there as “quasi-contemplatives”
(11) could better be called “masked contemplatives,” as in Maritain’s own es-
say: “I especially like the term ‘masked contemplatives,’ which expresses much
better what I mean. As far as I know they are contemplatives but they have
no real way of knowing that they are because their gifts of understanding and
wisdom are not strong enough to enable them to recognize their experience for
what it is. They know God by experience but they can’t interpret that experi-
ence” (Thomas Merton, The Courage for Truth: Letters to Writers, ed. Christine M.
Bochen [New York: Farrar, Straus, Giroux, 1993], 24). In the revised edition of
What Is Contemplation? published in London in 1950 by Burns and Oates, Mer-
ton adds two sentences at the end of the paragraph about quasi-contemplatives:
“They are much closer to God than they realize. They enjoy a kind of ‘masked’
contemplation” (this edition is the one that has been reprinted in various for-
mats: see Thomas Merton, What Is Contemplation? [Springfield, IL: Templegate,
1981], 32). These same sentences appear in the much more extensive revision of
What Is Contemplation? that became The Inner Experience, though the term “quasi-
contemplatives” has been replaced there with “hidden contemplatives” (Thomas
Merton, The Inner Experience: Notes on Contemplation, ed. William H. Shannon
[San Francisco: HarperCollins, 2003], 64).
direction of mystics, victim souls, etc., etc., we will follow our

usual procedure in studying the history of the question, and will
then concern ourselves with concrete examples and problems that
have arisen in the past, considering the way the problems were
solved, or what solutions were attempted. The advantage of this
approach will be, once again, to avoid the impression that there
is some magic technique by which one can became an “expert direc-
tor” as soon as one has been initiated into the proper theological
and pastoral secrets. We must avoid illusions of grandeur both in
the matter of direction, as well as in superiorship and in applying
psychiatry to members of a religious community. All these offices
or techniques are necessary, and must be used humbly, reverently
and prudently in union with God’s will and the directives of the
Church. But great harm can be done by persons who uncon-
sciously exploit souls to magnify their own egos and to substanti-
ate their own illusions about themselves, or about the group with
which they have identified themselves (for instance sacrificing
the genuine good of individuals and of the community to a pro-
gram of some movement or to some school of thought).
Questions and Objections: sometimes today, in view of the
new developments in the Church, the revival of a more liturgical
and objective spirituality, with less emphasis on the individual,
the question is asked: has the importance of spiritual direc-
tion been exaggerated? And if this is the case, should spiritual
direction be de-emphasized? Should it even be discarded alto-
gether? Is spiritual direction necessary? Some seem to think
that the emphasis on spiritual direction is harmful. In favor of
this view, it is argued that:
a) This view is consistent with the whole movement of

Catholic thought and spirituality today, which is consistently
revaluating all that has taken place since the fourteenth and fif-
teenth centuries.
b) But, it is argued, a great deal of what has taken place since
the fifteenth century has been degraded and deficient, and has been
evidence of decadence in Christian thought and spirituality. In
particular, one looks with very special suspicion on all the de-
velopments that are characteristic of these periods, and produced
by them as manifestations of their own temper.
c) It is further argued that this period has produced an in-
dividualistic piety, out of contact with the liturgy, with a distorted
view of the sacramental life of the Church, out of contact with
the fullness of the Christian mysteries. The developments that
seemed like “progress” in this period were in fact deviations from
the right path. These developments were doubtless necessary but
they were also unhealthy symptoms.
d) Spiritual direction as a professional concern of certain
priests and even congregations arose to fill certain needs created
by this individualistic piety, so the argument continues. It there-
fore took an exaggerated turn, and also contributed to a further
distortion of the truly Catholic mentality.
e) Therefore (it is concluded) the whole development of
spiritual direction as an institution, since the late Middle Ages,
will have to be revaluated. The emphasis on direction must stop.
We must recognize that it is of far less value than has hitherto
been claimed. Souls can very well get along without it. To insist
that one needs direction is to perpetuate this false mentality, this
unhealthy attitude, etc., etc.
f) Furthermore, direction fixes the attention of the one di-
rected upon himself and leads to morbid introspection or at least
to useless concern with one’s own perfection.
g) Finally, spiritual direction has been replaced by psychia-
try, psychoanalysis, and counselling. These modern techniques
are more scientific as well as more adapted to the needs of mod-
ern man, and to require spiritual direction in addition to them is
useless and even harmful.
Such are the arguments advanced. They have some truth in them,
but taken as a whole they in their own turn represent a rather
unhealthy tendency. What we have to do is evaluate these points
rightly, consider what the Church teaches on direction, and make
a sober and wise use of the traditional view of direction.
Answer: these objections, while having some truth in

them, are not in accordance with Catholic tradition,
which teaches that spiritual direction is not only useful
but may be in some cases necessary, at least for full growth
in Christian sanctity. It is true, however, that the notion of di-
rection has been distorted and exaggerated in the minds of some
directors and some schools of spirituality. These exaggerations
have harmful tendencies, and must be understood and avoided.
In considering the history of the question we shall try to take note
of some of the difficulties and problems that have arisen.
The mind of the Church: provisionally we may quote two or
three authoritative examples of the Church’s teaching on the
value of direction, before going into greater detail:
I. In 1260 the Brethren of the Free Spirit were condemned

for teaching that one should not ask counsel from learned men
sive de devotione sive de aliis.695
II. Leo XIII, in Testem Benevolentiae (22 January 1899, against
“Americanism”):
1) reproached some who thought “the guidance of the Holy

Spirit was sufficient”696 for a perfect Christian life;
2) {maintained that} the exterior teaching authority of the
Church and the sanctifying action of her ministers is necessary
to complete the interior action of the Holy Spirit; not that the Holy
Spirit is not capable Himself of forming and sanctifying souls,
but other impulsions and inspirations not proceeding from Him
may be accepted as His; Leo XIII points out that those who seek
a higher perfection are more likely to go astray on their own and
have more need than others of a spiritual guide; ergo, all need some
direction, but those seeking perfection need it in a special way;
695. “whether from devotion or for other reasons” (Gabriel de Sainte-Ma-

rie-Madeleine, “Direction Spirituelle: V. Justification théologique,” DS 3, col.
1175, quoting St. Albert the Great, as Bishop of Ratisbon).
696. Gabriel de Sainte-Marie-Madeleine, “Direction Spirituelle,” col. 1176.
3) Christ makes use of intermediaries in dealing with souls,

and these are His ministers; to reject this teaching of the Church
would be rash and dangerous. Theologians generally agree that
since there is a general call to perfection and since spiritual direction
is needed for this, there is a general need for spiritual direction.
It is at least supremely valuable, even when not absolutely
essential.
III. In Menti Nostrae, Pope Pius XII (23 September 1950)

teaches: in n. 53, without spiritual direction, a “prudent guide,”
“it is often very difficult to be duly responsive to the impulses
of the Holy Spirit and the grace of God.”697 This teaching is pru-
dent and moderate. In nn. 68, 69 (read698) he praises spiritual
directors. In n. 96 he stresses the importance of spiritual direction
and formation of seminarians.699
IV. The French Bishops, in 1951, issuing directives for pas-

toral theology of {the} sacraments, {write}: “No soul must be
697. Gabriel de Sainte-Marie-Madeleine, “Direction Spirituelle,” col. 1176.

698. “68. We desire likewise, in this paternal exhortation of Ours, to give
special mention to those priests who, in humility and burning charity, labor pru-
dently for the sanctification of their brother-priests as counsellors, confessors, or
spiritual directors. The incalculable good they render the Church remains hid-
den for the greater part, but it will one day be revealed in the glory of God’s
kingdom. 69. Not many years ago, with great satisfaction, We decreed the hon-
ors of the altar to the Turinese priest, Giuseppe Cafasso who, as you know, in a
most difficult period, was the wise and holy spiritual guide of not a few priests
whom he helped to progress in virtue and whose sacred ministry he rendered
particularly fruitful. We are fully confident that, through his powerful patron-
age, our Divine Redeemer will raise up many priests of like sanctity who will
bring themselves and their brethren in the ministry to such a height of perfec-
tion in their lives that the faithful, admiring their example, will feel themselves
moved spontaneously to imitate it” (Menti Nostrae: Apostolic Exhortation of Pope
Pius XII to the Clergy of the Entire World: On the Development of Holiness in Priestly
Life [Washington, DC: National Catholic Welfare Conference, 1950], 26–27).
699. The section title is “Their Directors Must Instill in Them the Ecclesias-
tical Virtues” (Menti Nostrae, 35).
exposed either to suffer, or to go astray, or to be delayed, due to

lack of a guide who may enlighten and aid him.”700
What is Spiritual Direction? What has been said so far has
really clarified nothing. We have not come to grips with the real
problem. On the one hand we have enumerated certain questions
and objections. On the other hand we have quoted several au-
thoritative statements of the Holy See. But if we imagine that we
have even begun from this to understand the problem of “spiri-
tual direction,” we are mistaken. And in the first place, to aid this
understanding, we must restore the right perspective (if there is
any one right perspective—at any rate we can stand back and be
critical of wrong perspectives). It is a mistake to make too much of
a problem out of spiritual direction. Spiritual direction tends to pose
more and more of a problem in proportion as we regard it more
and more as a magical technique of special and irreplaceable effi-
cacy, and as we regard the director as more and more of an official
and charismatic instrument or even as one who acts with special
jurisdiction from the Church.
Hence we must begin by defining spiritual direction. In a
very general way we will expect to find in the spiritual director
some sort of authoritative guidance in the ways of the interior life.
Precisely what is the nature of this guidance and what are its
characteristics? This is what we must now consider. Let us, in-
stead of giving a strict definition, limit the field of our investiga-
tion by two possible definitions, both of which are tenable and
which can be said to be at opposite extremes.
A. The strict, technical and “modern” view:

1. The director is either a priest or someone with a special
office in the Church of God (v.g. a novice mistress in a convent).
The position of the director is official or quasi-official. The direc-
tor is someone who has received more or less of a special techni-
cal preparation for his office. Because of his office and because
700. Directoire pour la Pastorale des Sacrements, n. 49, quoted in Gabriel de

Sainte-Marie-Madeleine, “Direction Spirituelle,” col. 1178.
he is delegated by the Church, he can count on very special graces

of state. His functions are more or less clearly indicated or at least
implied in Church Law or the constitutions of religious orders.
2. He has a special function not only to guide souls and re-
solve certain questions of import, especially at certain crucial
moments, as in the choice of a vocation, or in an annual retreat,
but especially to form them according to some special appropriate
way of spirituality which is assumed to be willed for them by
God. He exercises constant and vigilant care over the soul. He
tests and humiliates the soul. In practice, this concept often means
that the director is one who ex officio takes on the formation of
certain souls confided to him by the very fact that they have en-
tered an institution where he exercises his functions. In such a
case his “formation” is carried on according to an a priori system.
Individual differences are of course respected, but it is the system
and the form according to the “spirituality of the institute” that
receives major emphasis. The director strictly guides the soul and
controls the development of the penitent.
3. The one directed entrusts himself more or less completely
to the director as a representative of the Church and of an insti-
tute or school of spirituality. He “puts himself in the hands” of
the director, who is conceived to have considerable power in
“forming” his charges. Though a vow of obedience may not nec-
essarily be taken, the emphasis is on strict docility to the director,
considered as an “expert.” Since in practice the direction given
is often united with confession, the one directed begins by mak-
ing a general confession. Otherwise he at least starts out with a
complete manifestation of conscience, so that his “case” may be
completely clear to his director, who thereafter takes over “pro-
fessionally,” more or less like a doctor or a psychiatrist.
4. The one directed then presents himself regularly at a fixed
time for his spiritual direction, in which he manifests his difficulties
and problems, or speaks of his prayer and progress in the spiritual
life, and the director hands down more or less authoritative answers
and detailed directions which are to be followed with fidelity, be-
cause the efficacy of the “formation” will depend on this. For the
director is a mediator of grace and to fail to follow his instructions

is to neglect grace. The director is regarded as an oracle.
B. The broad and pre-technical view: at the other extreme from
this modern professional, technical and institutional concept of
direction is a very broad and informal concept:
1. The “director” may be anyone at all, man or woman, lay-
person or religious, at least someone with spiritual experience, but
not necessarily any official position. In this sense the guidance
given by a parent is analogous to spiritual direction. The “direc-
tor” may simply be a trusted and experienced friend, who in in-
timate conversations or by letters makes valued suggestions,
offers encouragement and inspiration which aid one in spiritual
progress. For this to merit the name of direction in any real sense,
there must be something of a formal consultation, and not just
casual conversation. That is to say, one must really ask for guid-
ance, with the awareness that the person is competent to speak
with some kind of (very broad and spiritual) authority. {For} ex-
ample, {see} the part played by Léon Bloy in the conversion of
the Maritains and Van der Meer de Walcheren.701
701. See the two volumes of reminiscences of Raïssa Maritain: We Have

Been Friends Together: Memoirs, trans. Julie Kernan (New York: Longmans, Green,
1942), especially chapter 5, “Léon Bloy,” detailing the Maritains’ first encounters
with Bloy and his growing influence on their interest in Christianity (104–40),
and chapter 6, “The Call of the Saints,” bringing the story up through their bap-
tism, with Bloy as their godfather (141–79); and Adventures in Grace, trans. Julie
Kernan (New York: Longmans, Green, 1945), especially chapter 2, “Some Con-
quests of the Ungrateful Beggar,” which discusses Bloy’s influence on the con-
version of Pierre and Christine Van der Meer de Walcheren (33–42), and chapter
9, “The Last Years of Léon Bloy” (217–62). See also van der Meer de Walcheren’s
book Rencontres: Leon Bloy, Raissa Maritain, Christine et Pieterke (Paris: Desclée de
Brouwer, 1961), which he sent to Merton who was “Moved deeply and to tears”
by it (Turning Toward the World, 145 [7/26/61]); Merton acknowledges the gift in
a letter of July 28, 1961: “It was a joy to receive your book with the very cordial
dedication which you inscribed there. I am convinced that you speak the truth,
because when I read your pages, a feeling sweeps over me which takes in all of
your love for ‘our spiritual family.’ I feel an extraordinary affinity with that
wonderful brilliance of Léon Bloy. . . . The part on Léon Bloy is wonderful. All
2. The relations of the one directed and {the} director are in-
formal, perhaps even in some sense casual. But at least it is clear
that one is receiving guidance and help from the other. There is
a distinct relationship of “spiritual filiation,” in however broad
a sense. But there is no question of the one having formal author-
ity over the other.
3. The director discreetly and informally conveys to the one
directed the knowledge of a certain spiritual “way,” not necessar-
ily systematic at all, not necessarily connected with any spiritual
school or institution, but at least conceived as being appropriate
for this individual. “This is the way for you to follow.”
4. The director is conceived as exercising a divine and spiritual
action in the life of the one directed, though perhaps only very
vaguely. However this relationship is fluid and so informal that the
directives given are not always taken with uniform seriousness.
But certain directives are recognized to be of paramount importance
to the one directed. They “click.” He feels that they are answers to
his questions and that he ought to follow them. In this instance
there is in a very general way a kind of spiritual direction.
These two descriptions of direction may help us to answer
some of the initial questions. Those who seriously question the value
of spiritual direction and who think it is out of date or undesirable
are generally speaking of type A (technical) and usually of this
type in its most formal variety. No one seriously questions that there
will always necessarily be at least some sort of direction of type B,
or that such direction is desirable. There is no question that spiri-
tual advice and guidance of an informal kind, at least, is neces-
sary. On the other hand, when the Holy See stresses the need for
direction, the implication always is that what is meant is direction
of type A (see for instance Menti Nostrae). However the terms are
not rigidly set, and no one has to hold that direction of type A is
‘my’ France comes back to me, with the mystery of my own vocation which my
sojourn in France had prepared” (Thomas Merton, The School of Charity: Letters
on Religious Renewal and Spiritual Direction, ed. Patrick Hart [New York: Farrar,
Straus, Giroux, 1990], 139).
the only kind admissible as fulfilling the requirements of the

Church. Sometimes direction of type B is heightened by a defi-
nitely or at least seemingly charismatic character. In this case it retains
its informality, its spontaneity, but emphasis is on the supernatural
intervention of grace. The director is regarded as a special instru-
ment of God, and all the more so in so far as jurisdictional and
institutional limits are not decisive in his exceptional case. We
shall see cases of direction of priests by laypersons and even
women. Some of them {are} genuine. But here we run into danger
of illuminism and superstition. Hence while the Church would
not deny the existence of direction of type B, this would receive
very little official encouragement. Theologians today would not
tend to stress this type of direction, or to take it very seriously.
A practical solution: it seems that the practical solution of our
problems lies in a moderate position, including the values of both
extremes. This moderate position can be called traditional and
monastic.
The monastic view: this view stresses both the spiritual authority
(as opposed to juridical authority) of the director and the spontane-
ity of the relationship between the one directed and the director.
In common with type A, the director, not necessarily a priest or
someone with a special office, is definitely marked out by his state
and holiness of life, his learning and experience, as a guide for
others. His authority may be ministerial, charismatic, or both.
Hence he is usually one who has received a special preparation
for his functions and can be regarded as representing the Church, in
so far as he speaks with the voice of tradition and in accordance
with the Church. He may also have a special office in the Church.
But even a layman, in very special circumstances, might conceiv-
ably fulfill such a function, preferably in union with the hierarchy
and in subordination to them. (The ancient monks were “laymen.”)
Also in common with type A, the director definitely guides the soul
in the ways of the spirit. He not only hands down an authoritative
instruction on the ways of the ascetic life, but in a very special way
he helps his penitent to see and understand God’s plan for his own
life and to generously put into action his powers in corresponding
with God’s action day by day. The director, or better, “spiritual
father,” is to be trusted and followed with docility; he speaks for

God, but he does not for all that exercise an absolute authority
over the soul. He still suggests and urges, he encourages, he ad-
vises, but he does not peremptorily issue orders (except in certain
rare cases). He may help the soul in the work of its spiritual forma-
tion, but in this case it is clear that he does not himself form the soul.
Rather he aids the soul to grow and attain the proper stature willed
for it by the Holy Ghost. (Note here that jargon about the “soul”
is regrettable; it is the whole person who is formed in organic
spiritual growth.) The one directed puts himself in the hands of
the director, but not under the despotic control of the director. He
receives the decisions of the director in faith, and follows the sug-
gestions of the director in obeying God. He is not so much in the
hands of the director as in the hands of God. But the director is
inspired and directed by God and he is empowered to clarify God’s
action. The real importance of the director is that without him the action
of God cannot really be discovered or properly understood. (On the other
hand it is by no means held that the director has a special power
to form the soul according to an approved system and that without
him the soul can never receive the proper form.) This view lays
less emphasis on the director as cause, mediator and agent in the
physical order. The mediation of the director is exercised above
all in the realm of prayer. His efficacy is a matter not of professional
know-how but of spiritual fatherhood, and this in turn is connected
with his humility and charity, rather than with his authoritarian
powers and learning. Openness and manifestation of thoughts is of
primary importance, but still there is less emphasis on direction
as a “process” and “system.” More important is the personal rela-
tionship and the intimate filial rapport which has its own prime sig-
nificance, which outweighs anything that is said or done in the
direction conversation. (Note the direction is a familiaris et amica
conversatio,702 in the terms of Adam of Perseigne.)
702. “familiar and friendly conversation”; the terms, though not the ex-
act phrase, are found in Adam’s first letter: “Nascitur etiam ex amica frequenti et
honesta collocutione commendabilis quaedam familiaritas” (“From frequent friendly
and frank conversation is also born a certain praiseworthy intimacy”); “Religiosa
In common with type B, besides the informality and casual-

ness of the relationship at times, great emphasis is placed on the
spontaneity and freedom of the relationship, and particularly
as regards the initial choice of the director. It is alien to the monas-
tic view of direction to insist that a director be imposed on
anyone, and that anyone should be bound to take direction
against his will from someone whom he does not fully trust,
or still more from one whom he has not even consulted in
spiritual matters. We must distinguish the sedulously faithful
obedience in foro externo which the monk owes in justice to his su-
periors in all their commands and wishes according to the Rule,
from the prudence with which the subject will seek and follow
spiritual advice. He can and should seek such advice from his su-
periors who may be presumed to know him well. But obedience
does not require that one seek this direction from them in all the in-
timate affairs of the interior life. One is free to choose his spiritual
guide. However, once one has chosen a director, then his direc-
tion is to be followed faithfully and with humble charity, even to
a heroic degree. The monastic view seeks to protect the one di-
rected from tyrannical and ruthless interventions and from the
arbitrary imposition of systems, even by superiors.
The History of Spiritual Direction in the Church: here
we can profitably consider the development of the idea of direc-
tion, in a very general way, with special emphasis on the “profes-
sional” and “institutional” concept which belongs to the more
modern period. Material {is taken} from the very long and de-
tailed article in DS: “Direction Spirituelle.”703
magistri conversatio exemplo suae probitatis provocat novitium ad studium aemulan-

dae virtutis. . . . Amica et spiritualis collocatio consulte, ut dictum est, opponitur
acediae morbo” (“The master’s religious conversation encourages the novice by
the example of his own integrity to a desire to imitate his virtue. . . . Friendly
spiritual conversation, as has been said, is deliberately set against the disease of
acedia” (PL 211, cols. 586B, 588A).
703. Édouard Des Places, “Direction Spirituelle: I. Dans l’Antiquité Clas-
sique,” DS 3, cols. 1002–1008; Irénée Hausherr, “Direction Spirituelle: II. Chez
les Chrétiens Orientaux,” cols. 1008–60; “Direction Spirituelle: III. En Occident:
A. Classical background: we pass over here the very inter-

esting and important topic of direction in Yoga and in Buddhism,
etc., {with} just a word on the master-disciple relationship in
classical philosophical schools.
1. The basic idea is that the sage is one who, because of his
very unique qualities, his wisdom, his virtue, his gift of insight,
makes others better by their very contact with him. Socrates,
Pythagoras, etc. (though Socrates disclaims the role of didas-
kalos)704 improve and transform the life of the disciple who comes
to them. Hence one seeks out a “master” who will effect this
transformation, and make one ready for a higher kind of life.
2. What is the higher life for which the sage prepares? It may
be a political life (active life) or a contemplative and speculative
life of philosophy.
3. An essential element in the relationship of master and
disciple, and in {the} disciple with regard to wisdom {is that} it
is gratuitous. Once the master accepts the disciple, he does not
get paid (but he does not have to accept everyone either) and the
disciple does not seek wisdom for his own personal profit either.
The didaskalos moves in a realm of dedication to wisdom.
4. What then are the real conditions, if money has no place
in the relationship? First the disciple must open himself com-
pletely and confide absolutely in the guidance of the master he
has chosen. Then over a more or less long period of time the
master tests the disciple by special trials, proves his fidelity and
his capacity, etc. If after this “novitiate” the relationship is ce-
mented, then direction (philosophical instruction) can begin.
5. Is a master necessary? Varying answers {are given} to this
question: normally, yes. However Epicurus distinguishes three
kinds of men: those who reach truth alone; those who reach truth
C. Période Moderne”: André Rayez, “Introduction,” cols. 1099–1108; Michel

lphe-Galliard, “Au 16e Siècle,” cols. 1108–19; Charles Berthelot du Chesnay,
O
“Du 17e Siècle à Nos Jours,” cols. 1119–42.
704. “teacher”: Apology, 33 (Hausherr, “Direction Spirituelle,” col. 1009).
with a guide; those who need a “trainer” (special discipline for

more fundamental rough work).
6. {The} concept of the philosophical community in Epicu-
reanism {requires} an enclosed community of friends (the “Gar-
den of Epicurus”; cf. the Stoa, etc.). The formation of this
community {is} a reaction against the confusion and degradation
of the times, a kind of “refuge of sanity.” Its purpose {is} the
healing of suffering and anxious souls. Epicurus was a physician
of souls, {seeking} to restore them to the ways of peace and hap-
piness. (Note: the Epicureans were atheists.) Epicurus said: “The
young man must not put off the study of philosophy, nor must
the old man become tired of its study. For it is never too early or
too late to occupy oneself with the health of one’s soul. And to
say that the time for philosophy has not yet come or has passed
by is to say that the time to be happy has not yet come, or is no
more. Hence it is the duty both of the young man and of the old
to study philosophy.”705 Epictetus and Seneca (Stoics) approached
the problem in much the same general way, and made use of
special techniques for the correction of faults, the development
of virtues, and self-discipline. They taught systematic examina-
tion of conscience and meditation. Seneca’s perspectives {were}
centered on the immortality of the soul, spiritualization of matter
{and} abandonment to the will of the Supreme Ruler.
B. Early Christian monasticism in the Orient: what has been
said of the classical period resembles what became traditional in
the Christian East. Here again the disciple seeks out a master,
either in a community or alone in the desert. He believes that
there is one special master for him and he must find that one.
Having found him, he will believe everything he says and follow
all his counsels with complete docility. Here again there is a ques-
tion of complete openness, and of testing. The relationship formally
begins when these preliminaries have been satisfactorily com-
pleted. Then the novice takes up residence with his “senior,”
705. Quoted in Des Places, col. 1005.

“elder” or “presbyter,” and simply lives as he does, following

his actions and declaring to him his thoughts, so that the elder,
with the gift of insight, may explain to him the origin and mean-
ing of each drive and how to deal with it. Ascetic training {is}
based on the struggle with the eight principal “spirits” or vices.
It is aimed at control of the passions (apatheia), in preparation for
the contemplative life. Later the master may also initiate the dis-
ciple into the mysteries of the spiritual sense of Scripture and there-
fore of theoria. Some of the Desert Fathers refused to “teach”
anyone the ways of spiritual understanding; others were less
hesitant. Some—witness the works of Evagrius—would lead the
mature disciple on into the realm of theologia and contemplation
without concepts.
{There was an} emphasis on charismatic paternity. The “senior”
is primarily and above all a spiritual father. He is not simply a
wiser monk who resolves cases of conscience, teaches a spiritual
technique, or initiates into the ways of prayer. He does in some
sense carry on the education and the formation of the disciple,
but above all he is a “father” who by his prayer, concern, paternal
care, guidance and instruction brings forth a higher life in the
disciple. This paternity is supernatural and shares in the action of the
divine fatherhood. It is thus chiefly as spiritual father that the elder
represents God. He has usually no juridical or priestly status at
all. Clearly his function is not to attach the disciple to himself as
his spiritual child but to help him grow as a child of the heavenly
Father, so that Christ is formed in him. The fatherly concern of
the elder fixes the attention of the disciple on his true Father who
is God. He also brings him to know more and more clearly that
the Holy Spirit is his true guide and that Christ is his Master. But
a long period of trial and instruction is necessary for this. How-
ever, when the disciple has been liberated from vices and sins,
then he has the unction of the Holy Spirit, and the elder releases
him to send him off on his own. After that the monk lives with
God, and obeys God directly, until he in his turn becomes a mas-
ter sought out by others. All this is dependent on the will of God,
and directed by Him. No one seeks to set himself up as master;
no one seeks of his own accord to be independent and autono-

mous, to be “his own master.” This is a sign that one is still in
need of much discipline. The heart of the direction given by the
master is always the healing of the disciple, his re-formation in
Christ, by the Cross, strengthening him to receive the salutary
discipline of God Himself. {He learns} to obey God with loving
acceptance of all trials and sufferings, and thus to become free
from dependence on worldly happiness and support, able to be
guided directly by God. These principles are of great importance
for us, and should be learned from the study of monastic sources
and especially Cassian and the Desert Fathers.
In medieval monasticism much the same principles prevail:
we need not go over them in detail here. See what has been said
elsewhere concerning the ideas of Adam of Perseigne on monas-
tic formation, for example.706
Direction of virgins and laypeople in the early Church comes
under the ordinary life of the parish (see Gregory {the} Great:
Regula Pastoralis, III707). It is a responsibility first of all of the bishop.
Occasionally the bishop may call in monks or men of special
holiness to help in the cure of souls, and generally holy monks
themselves often became bishops in Gaul and the West.
706. Thomas Merton, “The Feast of Freedom: Monastic Formation accord-

ing to Adam of Perseigne,” in The Letters of Adam of Perseigne, vol. 1, trans. Grace
Perigo, CF 21 (Kalamazoo, MI: Cistercian Publications, 1976), 3–48; this is a
somewhat expanded version of “Christian Freedom and Monastic Formation,”
American Benedictine Review, 13 (September 1962), 289–313, which is itself a lon-
ger version of the article “La Formation Monastique selon Adam de Perseigne,”
Collectanea Ordinis Cisterciensium Reformatorum, 19 (January 1957), 1–17.
707. See St. Gregory the Great, Pastoral Care, trans. Henry Davis, sj, ACW
11 (Westminster, MD: Newman Press, 1950): Part III of the work (89–233), en-
titled “How the Ruler Should Teach and Admonish His Subjects by His Holy
Life,” is made up almost entirely of instructions on adapting pastoral teaching
“to the individual in his respective needs” (89); see in particular c. 27, “How to
admonish the married and the celibate” (186–92) and c. 28, “How to admonish
those who have had experience of sins of the flesh, and those who have not”
(192–98).
C. Middle Ages—the mendicants: with the mendicants we

see the beginning of the growth of modern spiritual direction.
The mendicants come in as shock troops, with special work to
do, to revive the Christian spirit and to awaken souls to a new
birth in the Christian life which has begun to be dormant. This
idea of a reawakening on a large scale, and of special missionaries
of the Church to bring it about, had not been so familiar in the
early days. The need had not been so acutely felt.
1. Laypeople {receive} direction in the confessional. The
“specialist” in religious revival, who is the mendicant friar, in-
structs the penitent in examination of conscience and in ways of
extricating himself from habitual sin, {and} tries to orient {the}
penitent to a new life in Christ, often very successfully. Lay peni-
tents embrace deep spiritual life and often become mystics. They
enter confraternities with regular direction as part of {the}
curriculum.
2. Religious—the formation of religious: at this time there arises
a great concern over the formation of novices as an institutional
responsibility. In the medieval monastic orders the formation of
novices meant largely their instruction in matters of rule and
observance, and chant. Their spiritual instruction they got from
the abbot in chapter, from their reading, etc. Undoubtedly there
was also spiritual advice given and very wisely. There was direc-
tion. But now there arises a new concern over the “method of
training novices.” A Dominican of the fifteenth century writes a
formal Tractatus de Institutione Novitiorum.708
The direction of contemplatives: in many districts, especially in
the Rhineland and Flanders, where there was a great wave of
fervor sweeping over convents of nuns and communities of Bé-
guines, priests, chiefly of mendicant orders, were in demand.
The great mystic movement of the Rhineland, owing its origin
to Cistercian influence on Béguines, spreads due to the words,
directions and writings of Eckhart and his school. The union of
708. Treatise on the Formation of Novices (Rayez, col. 1101).

the “fratres docti”709 appointed by the Order {of} Preachers over

the seventy convents of contemplative Dominican nuns {was}
fruitful in speculative mysticism. In the fifteenth century there
follows a great multiplication of manuals to instruct confessors and
directors. The Manipulus Curatorum 710 of Guy de Montrocher
(fifteenth century) distinguishes the confessio sacramentalis of the
pastor and confessio directiva711 of a “specialist” who may come
in from outside the parish on a mission or some other occasion,
and may then be kept as one’s director. Here we see the modern
concept pretty well stabilized. It will develop along these lines.
3. The director and {the} retreat movement: under the influ-
ence of men like Savonarola, emphasizing {the} need for reform
of Christian life, retreats and missions began to be very popular,
and the movement grew all through the fifteenth and sixteenth
centuries, especially when Spiritual Exercises after the fashion
of St. Ignatius became widespread and customary. It was generally
on retreat, or making the Exercises, that one came in contact with
a director, whom one thereafter frequented and obeyed, to keep
up the good work begun. Development of seminary education
brings the position of director into prominence (especially after
{the} Council of Trent). (In the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries,
we have come a long way from the Desert Fathers.) the director
becomes a specialist in two things above all: (a) treatment
of scruples; (b) deciding one’s vocation.
D. The Counter-Reformation: what has been said of the late
Middle Ages, becomes a full reality in the Counter-Reformation.
{Specialized direction} becomes characteristic of that period,
whereas it only existed in embryo in the fifteenth century. After
Trent it is widespread and common. An important factor con-
tributing to the development of direction after Trent {is} the ref-
ormation of religious orders. Habitual spiritual direction becomes
709. “learned brothers” (Rayez, col. 1101).

710. Handbook for Confessors, published in 1471 but written in 1333 (Rayez,
col. 1105).
711. “sacramental confession . . . confession of direction.”
a constant and important factor in the reform of religious com-

munities. Direction becomes a special, almost exclusive function
reserved to the priest and bishop (except cases of novice mis-
tresses, etc.). Since manuals of direction are numerous, theoreti-
cally any priest can learn to be a director (but in actual fact special
gifts are required). It remains in fact a work for specialists. Direc-
tion becomes closely tied up with emphasis on mental prayer as an
aid to religious reform. Hence the director also normally gives
instruction and guidance in mental prayer as a first-aid method
in combating religious tepidity. The importance of the director
in the realm of mental prayer is also heightened by the necessity
to distinguish the “true path” in prayer from illuminism, etc.
Hence the director tends, in many cases, to insist on “safe and
approved methods” to avoid {the} danger of quietism and other
errors. {The} director {functions} as {the} guardian of orthodoxy
in the mystic. Savonarola had recommended meditation on the
mysteries of Christ, especially the Passion (this in common with
the spirit of his time) as a remedy against the evils of spiritual
breakdown and tepidity. Luis de Granada also believed in the
special importance of mental prayer. Direction stresses methodi-
cal meditation on the mysteries.
Certain new religious congregations occupied themselves in
a special way with direction, retreats, missions, teaching mental
prayer and reviving devotion (Barnabites, Theatines). A “great
director” was Baptista de Cremona who directed two founders
of such congregations, St. Anthony Maria Zaccaria, founder of
the Barnabites, and St. Cajetan of Thiene.712 {He also} influenced
Scupoli’s Spiritual Combat, characteristic of the spirituality of this
period (sixteenth century).
Direction is sometimes intermittent, given only on special
occasions like the annual retreat, but more usually habitual, at
frequent and regular intervals. There are differences in various
approaches to direction. Some teach a methodical way of perfection,
712. See Olphe-Galliard, “Direction Spirituelle: III,” cols. 1108–1109.

others interest themselves more in “states of soul” and observing

the inner experiences of the subject, in order to guide him (gener-
ally her) in the ways of union.
The Jesuits: the Spiritual Exercises {were} a retreat conducted
by a specially trained and qualified director. Rules for the discern-
ment of spirits {were emphasized}. {The} director helps {the} re-
treatant to go through “crisis” (judgement) and make a decision
according to the Holy Spirit. Normally after one has made the
Exercises one remains under the guidance of a director. In the
Society {of} Jesus a spiritual director other than the superior {is}
required by {the} Constitutions. Confession and direction {are}
united usually. St. Peter Canisius made his confession every eve-
ning before retiring. Direction of (lay) students in Jesuit schools
{was} an essential part of religious training.
Others: {the} French School {includes} St. Francis de Sales,
Bérulle, St. Vincent de Paul, Olier, Tronson, etc. {These were} great
directors, especially concerned with the direction of seminarists
and priests, in addition to active and contemplative religious. With
St. Francis de Sales we find the director as {a} liberator who deliv-
ers the contemplative soul from complications and burdens im-
posed by those less wise.
E. Lay directors:713 pious women, female mystics and beatas
exercised a great influence in sixteenth-century Spain. Many of
these were alumbradas; many false mystics surrounded themselves
with credulous disciples. St. Teresa was a great example of a
woman who (like Catherine of Siena before her) transformed the
lives of most people she came in contact with. She directed several
persons outside her own convents, including her brother Lorenzo.
In the seventeenth century, particularly {in} France, there were
laymen and laywomen who became directors and even gave ad-
vice to religious communities: v.g. Gaston de Renty (d. 1649), Jean
de Bernières (d. l659), who gave direction and conferences to the
Ursuline nuns. Marie Rousseau (d. 1680), a wife of a wine merchant
713. See Berthelot du Chesnay, cols. 1131–33.

and mother of five children, gave advice to some of the most vir-
tuous souls of Paris; M. Olier highly praised her direction, which
he himself followed. Marie des Vallées (d. 1656) gave direction to
others and was herself directed by St. John Eudes.
The occasional director: since we are concerned with the mo-
nastic setting and with “contemplatives,” we are considering
above all consistent and steady direction by one director, one
“spiritual father.” However in practice it is important to take
account of the fact that for very many people, “direction” in its
most elementary form comes when they run into an occasional
confessor who, though a stranger to them, can give them some
good advice in the particular circumstances in which they find
themselves. This applies even in the “Easter duty” situation. An
article in Vie Spirituelle, Supplément (1955; n. 35) treats this: “Une
dimension oubliée du sacrement de pénitence.”714 Starting from
the problem of the Christian who may or may not get to the sac-
raments once a year, it goes on to lay down a principle that is
important for all direction. It is stated that in the case of the
“Easter duty” penitent it is not enough to remind him of the law
of God and get him to fulfill it, but a more constructive and posi-
tive approach is desirable—reintegration in the full life of the
Church and in God’s plan. {A} purpose of amendment {should
be} not just to keep the law of God but to really take one’s place
and one’s part in the Church as it actually exists, finding the plan
of God for the penitent in the context of the Church. Three prin-
ciples {are proposed}: to have in mind the plan of God rather than
the Law of God; to be concerned with the active building up of
the Church; and not with building up one’s own Church, i.e. not
roping in penitents to one’s pet project, necessarily. This remark
reminds us of valuable perspectives in direction, and it shows
that much good can be done in a case where there is a seemingly
chance encounter with an unknown confessor.
714. Thomas Suavet, op, “Note sur une Dimension Oubliée du Sacrement
de Pénitence,” La Vie Spirituelle, Supplément, 35 (1955), 406–11.
Necessity of Spiritual Direction: we have already seen that the

Church says more or less officially that spiritual direction is in
some sense necessary. We can sum up the common teaching on the
necessity of direction as follows:
a) In the Sacrament of Penance, the confessor has to give the

penitent sufficient direction and help to enable him to make his
confession properly, and to receive the sacrament worthily in
view of a constructive amendment of life, including advice for
the future, at least in a rudimentary form, if the penitent is strug-
gling with habitual sin.
b) There are “good souls” who are leading good Christian
lives and receiving the sacraments. No one would hold that for
these, spiritual direction is absolutely necessary. They can get
along without it, and often have to. Some would argue that they
are better off without it, as we have seen. This has to be taken
with a grain of salt, and with the aid of careful distinctions. A too
formal, systematic and domineering type of direction is useless
for them and would do more harm than good. No direction at all
would be preferable to this.
c) If direction is taken to be the art of leading souls to
their proper perfection according to their personal voca-
tion and their place in the Church, then for everyone desirous
of fully corresponding with his vocation, and even of finding his
vocation, some direction is morally necessary and habitual direction is
certainly useful. (Menti Nostrae says that without direction it is
“very difficult”715 to correspond with grace as one should. Testem
Benevolentiae says that those who seek higher perfection have
“greater need”716 than others of a spiritual guide.)
715. Menti Nostrae, 20 (n. 53).

716. “It must also be kept in mind that those who follow what is more
perfect are by the very fact entering upon a way of life which for most men is
untried and more exposed to error, and therefore they, more than others, stand
in need of a teacher and a guide” (Pope Leo XIII, True and False Americanism in
d) This is especially true of “contemplatives.” There have

been a variety of opinions in the matter, but in general since the
sixteenth century at any rate there has been more and more in-
sistence on this. Osuna believed direction to be “absolutely neces-
sary for those who wish to practice recollection.”717 St. Antoninus
(fifteenth century) was one of the strongest proponents of regular
direction. He claimed: “To arrive at the love of God and devotion,
to possess peace . . . it is useful and necessary to have a spiri-
tual guide to whom you can report at all times your conduct and
your failings that he may help and counsel you and allow you
to know your own state from hour to hour.”718 (Clearly this is
direction of the type A!)
St. Teresa emphasized the importance of contemplative nuns
having access to “learned men”719 in the confessional, for guid-
ance in the ways of prayer. We shall see what she says in greater
detail later. She distinguishes: direction is necessary, but a bad
confessor can do much harm, therefore no direction at all is better
than bad direction. This is a good principle. She says it is more
necessary for women than for men. She also places great empha-
sis on the ascetic value of “obedience” (docility) to a spiritual
guide. (She was not in favor of {a} vow of obedience to {one’s}
director.) The Jesuits placed great emphasis on direction; Alvarez
de Paz and Luis de Ponte felt that direction was “necessary for
contemplatives.”720 Here direction is usually inseparable from
confession. {In the} earlier tradition, Gerson thought direction
was necessary “for those called to mystical contemplation.”721
Religion: Apostolical Letter Testem Benevolentiae, in The Great Encyclical Letters of

Pope Leo XIII [New York: Benziger, 1903], 447).
717. Quoted in Olphe-Galliard, “Direction Spirituelle: III,” col. 1111.
718. Quoted in Rayez, col. 1105.
719. See Way of Perfection, c. 5: “Continues speaking of confessors. Explains why
it is important that they be learned men” (Complete Works of Saint Teresa, 2.22-26).
720. See Olphe-Galliard, “Direction Spirituelle: III,” col. 1118.
721. See Irénée Noye, “Note pour une Histoire de la Direction Spirituelle,”
La Vie Spirituelle, Supplément, 34 (1955), 262–63.
For St. Francis de Sales, “l’advertissement des advertissements”

was to “get a director.”722 In the seventeenth century the belief in
the power and value of the director reached its peak. After the
seventeenth century, a reaction set in. Caussade felt that a director
was more of a hindrance than a help.723 But he himself was a di-
rector and wrote many letters of direction. He meant the kind of
director who binds the soul and seeks to control it absolutely—i.e.
he reacted against “type A.” Dom Marmion was “not in favor of
overmuch direction”724 (again, meaning “type A”). Msgr. Gay,
who published four volumes of letters of direction, nevertheless
insisted that his penitents should not depend too much on direction,
but learn to stand on their own feet.725 All this is healthy. It seems
to represent the best Catholic tradition in this matter.
The authority of the director: the question of the authority of
the director is studied by those who favor type-A direction. For
these the director is normally a priest, or else someone who is
placed in a special office by the Church. Direction in the case of
priests or those in office is not an exercise of the power of
jurisdiction. This is important. Even those who favor type A
sedulously distinguish the director from the superior. The direc-
tor as such is not a superior. (He can of course also be a supe-
rior.) Therefore as director he has no potestas dominativa726 and
cannot demand obedience. Nor has he the power or the right to
dictate a given way in the spiritual life. He does not formally de-
clare the will of God: he can offer suggestions and counsels. He
can never force anyone to follow his guidance. Whether or not he
has the right to bind his penitent by a vow of obedience, this vow
is certainly not to be recommended. In what sense are the deci-
722. “the admonition of admonitions” (Introduction to the Devout Life, I.4,

quoted in Berthelot du Chesnay, col. 1119).
723. See Berthelot du Chesnay, col. 1133.
726. “authoritative power” (Gabriel de Sainte-Marie-Madeleine, “Direc-
tion Spirituelle,” col. 1183).
sions of a director said to represent the will of God? not in the

sense that they oblige the penitent to strict obedience under pain
of sin (except of course in cases where the director is simply point-
ing to an obligation that already exists, v.g. a vow, a law of the
Church), but in the sense that the path pointed out by the director
should be accepted with prudent docility as a sure way to God
that can be followed safely. However his authority is moral and
spiritual. As {a} priest he is a mediator. The power of the priest
director flows from his power of orders, from his priesthood, and
secondarily from his own special spiritual qualities. He is then an
authorized representative of Christ and the Church. He
can point out the way to correspond with grace and fulfill duties
in such a way as to reach perfection. {He} is to be followed with
faith and docility. The distinction between the director and the
superior may in practice seem academic, since both are to be fol-
lowed and believed as representatives of God in a spirit of faith.
However, the understanding of the docility due to a director is
something more subtle and spiritual, because more interior and
more mature, than the understanding of obedience due to a su-
perior who exercises power of jurisdiction. To say that one does
not formally “obey” a director does not diminish his authority or
the merit of our docility. The docility to a director requires a more
delicate conscience, a more spiritual understanding, a truer fidel-
ity and a more developed love because {it is} more interior and
personal. When there is a good and wise director, and when the
one directed is capable of corresponding with this grace with the
above dispositions, then direction can contribute to real and rapid
progress. (See below what is said about mediatorship and about
faith in Providence rather than in authority.727)
The function of the director: we have said that direction is the
art of leading souls to their proper perfection according to their
personal vocation and their place in the Church, of leading or guid-
ing, not pushing or carrying. The director can only point out the
727. See below, page 276.

way and suggest. The one directed has to do the travelling. {The}
basic principle behind the whole concept of direction {is that} the
penitent is one who belongs to God, his Creator and Redeemer. He
is called and sought by Christ. Christ, through the Church, seeks the
salvation and divinization of this penitent, partly by leading him by
his own proper way and partly by giving him a special place and func-
tion in the Church. These two are inseparable and never really in
contradiction, though they may seem to be. The director also rec-
ognizes the spiritual enemy placing obstacles in the way of the soul.
{He} must know how to distinguish between the true will of Christ
for this soul and the director’s own pet plans and projects, not
enforcing his own views as those of the Church or of Christ. Hence
a certain reserve and hesitation are praiseworthy.
The function of the director has to be seen in the light of the
whole Christian life. {In the} ascetic {dimension}, he must help the
one directed to take up his cross and carry it; he must help him to
die with Christ in order to live in Christ; he must help him to purify
his life of all that is useless and dead; he must strengthen what is
good, and educate it for further growth. {In the} mystical {dimen-
sion}, he must help the one directed to live in the light of the Res-
urrection, to recognize that light and appreciate it, to cooperate
with that light, to submit entirely to the Holy Spirit. The director
is not a superior. We shall see what else he is not in a moment. He
is a mediator, a master, a father, a physician, a guide. His mediator-
ship is especially clear when he is (as normally he is) a priest. He
is a channel of grace. As we have just explained, the juridical chan-
nels are not the only channels of grace, nor are they even the most
spiritual. In a sense there is a deeper and purer exercise of faith in
the mediatorship of the director (i.e. in the fact that he can represent
Christ for me) when he is not supported by a clear, external, juridi-
cal authority. This faith is a belief that Christ can send me this man
as His representative, and give him special graces with which to
guide me in my own peculiar case. This is a faith rather in Provi-
dence than in authority.
As master of the spiritual life the director has the power to
educate, to form the soul, in a discreet and broad sense, as an
instrument of the Holy Spirit. To be more accurate, he recognizes

the Holy Spirit as the true Master of the soul and knows how to
bring the one directed into loving and enlightened submission
to grace. Hence direction is an art rather than a science. It implies
tact and respect for the individual case in its own uniqueness.
The education given by the director can take many and varied
forms. It is above all a discipline: it involves correction, and the
prescription of works to be done, or at least counsel of the same.
It involves enlightenment, instruction, explanation of the spiri-
tual traditions of the Church, especially as embodied in liturgy
and monastic writings or rules. A director in our order gives his
direction always in relation to the framework of the Rule as a
spiritual code and directory. However it is never a question of
forcing the soul into a mold, a set pattern. The Rule {is} for the
soul, not the soul for the Rule.
As father {he acts} especially by his prayers and insight, and a
genuine affection, friendship, which must always be detached
and spiritual, but can be at the same time deeply human in the
right sense. The spiritual father is not just an oracle and a machine
for giving out directives. A real spiritual relationship of fatherhood
and sonship is established in spiritual direction, with mutual ob-
ligations of respect, concern, affection, fidelity and loyalty. It goes
without saying that discretion and the respect for secrecy is basic
for this kind of confident and trustful relationship. St. Benedict
demands that the spiritual father be one who “knows how to cure
his own wounds and not make known those of others” (Rule, ch.
46 end: read728). Note the natural temptation arising in the hearts
of those who have no natural family, seeking to acquire spiritual
children as consolation and support for themselves.
As physician, he has to diagnose spiritual sicknesses, even when
they are not apparent and symptoms are almost completely hid-
den. This involves much experience and grace. The penitent at the
728. Merton has just translated the conclusion of this chapter, “Of Those
Who Offend in Any Other Matters” (McCann, 108–109).
same time must take care to cooperate in this work of the spiritual
physician by frankly and humbly manifesting his interior state,
and not trying to conceal it: openness with a director is of the
greatest importance; by being willing to have his condition shown
to him frankly, and to take advice. The director has to prescribe
remedies and strengthen the penitent in his good tendencies.
As guide, he must lead the penitent in the “ways of God” by
prayer, instruction and example. Here example is most important.
Ideally speaking, the director is one who goes ahead (or has long
since gone ahead) along the road which the penitent wishes to
travel. However as there are many different ways and personal
vocations, it is not always possible (indeed it is very rare) to find
a director who has gone ahead on the way you yourself are called
to travel, if there is question of a rather special vocation. You may
have to be guided by someone who himself follows a slightly
different way. In the monastery, in so far as all are monks, there
is a sufficiently common bond because all follow the Rule. But
the Rule does not prescribe an iron-bound system for the regula-
tion of the inner life of each individual monk.
Qualities of a director—in brief he must as far as possible have
the following:
Holiness: at least in living up to the obligations of his state
and sincerely striving to seek God and follow Christ. No man is
without faults, and a temptation of beginners is to judge their
director when they find human frailties in him, as if this some-
how were a reason for not accepting his guidance with docility.
Learning: it is very important that the director have theological
learning and a good comprehension of Christian ascetic and mysti-
cal traditions. He should be a solid moral theologian with common
sense and breadth of view and a sound understanding of human
nature. It is also very desirable that he have a thorough grasp of the
principles of canon law, especially in the De Religiosis729 (for us).
729. See John A. Abbo and Jerome D. Hannan, The Sacred Canons: A Concise
Presentation of the Current Disciplinary Norms of the Church, second revised ed., 2
vols. (St. Louis: B. Herder, 1960), 1.479-687 (Canons 487–681).
Experience: he should at least have experience of the trials

and labors of the ascetic life. Traditionally it is required that a
director be one who has attained to a certain perfection in the
bios praktikos.730 He should not be the prey of his passions, or at
least he should understand the passions and appreciate the vicis-
situdes of the spiritual combat. It is also very desirable that he
be a man of prayer and a contemplative.
Humility: it is especially necessary for the director to be a
humble man who puts the interests of the ones directed above
his own, and does not simply seek to subjugate them to his own
ideas and dominate them by his own “spirituality.” He does not
want to attract disciples to himself and surround himself with a
coterie of dependents. He is interested in truth, in the action of
the Holy Spirit, in the will of God for these souls, and not in his
own prestige. On the contrary, see the portrait given by St. John
of the Cross of jealous and possessive directors:
And supposing that you have sufficient experience to di-

rect some one soul, which perchance may have no ability
to advance beyond your teaching, it is surely impossible
for you to have sufficient experience for the direction of all
those whom you refuse to allow to go out of your hands;
for God leads each soul along different roads and there
shall hardly be found a single spirit who can walk even
half the way which is suitable for another. Who can be like
S. Paul and have the skill to make himself all things to all
men, that he may gain them all? You yourself tyrannize
over souls, and take away their liberty, and arrogate to
yourself the breadth and liberty of evangelical doctrine, so
that you not only strive that they may not leave you, but,
what is worse, if any one of them should at some time have
gone to talk, with another director, of some matter which
he could not suitably talk of with you, or if God should
lead him in order to teach him something which you have
not taught him, you behave to him (I say it not without
730. “the active life.”

shame) like a husband who is jealous of his wife; nor is

your jealousy even due to desire for the honour of God,
or for the profit of that soul (for you must not presume to
suppose that in neglecting you in this way he was neglect-
ing God): it is due only to your own pride and presump-
tion, or to some other imperfect motive that concerns you
(Living Flame III.59; Peers, III, p. 193).
Together with humility go two other most important qualities:

prudence and charity. Of all these qualities the most important are
learning, humility, prudence and charity, as far as spiritual
direction itself is concerned. Holiness and experience are greatly
to be desired, but these alone without learning, prudence and
humble discretion may be useless or even lead to great harm.
2. Direction and Therapy

I. Direction as distinct from counselling, psychotherapy and
psychoanalysis
Counselling:
a) What is counselling? Today many priests and non-Catholic
ministers, as well as professional “counsellors,” are called upon to
give “counselling,” which is quite distinct from spiritual direction.
Counselling is concerned with moral issues, but it is most directly
concerned with these in so far as they involve the psychophysical reac-
tions of the one counselled and in relation to social adaptation. Coun-
selling is therefore mostly concerned with ethical problems in so
far as they imply problems of health, especially mental health, and
of social adaptation. Counselling aims at maintaining a normal and
healthy balance in one’s personal life by giving general advice on
common problems. Counselling implies a certain insight in the
counsellor and a certain technical training (usually psychological
and sociological), but it deals with general problems and general
norms, though of course applying these to the personal situation
of the one seeking counsel. The counsellor gives advice on common
problems of our time and our society, especially marriage problems,
the sex problems of the adolescent, problems of employment, where
to live, how to get along in the neighborhood where one lives, how
to advance in one’s field of work, or how to select an employment
in the first place, etc. Hence it can be seen that though counselling
may often involve spiritual and ethical questions, it touches on
these only indirectly, and in the case of spiritual matters it touches
on them so superficially that it may be said not to deal with them
at all.
b) Secular counselling: counselling is, in effect, a kind of
secular direction, and very often it prescinds from the whole idea
of spirituality or even of morality. In many cases counselling,
even by ministers of religion, has become a completely secular
substitute for confession and direction. It is, moreover, an Ameri-
can term, and is typical of the American scene. The approach is
friendly, spontaneous, simple, practical, not to say quite often
pragmatic. It presupposes that the problems of life have simple
solutions and that a little good will and “know-how” will help
one to find them, or failing this, one will simply learn to “accept
the situation” without rebellion and conflict.
{There are} advantages and disadvantages of counselling: it can
be said for counselling that it is often useful for people who do not
have deep spiritual or psychological problems. It is a simple aid
in the normal difficulties of American life, oriented towards a re-
alistic and matter-of-fact acceptance of ordinary difficulties and of
one’s own limitations. Generally counselling aims at helping you
to help yourself. Against it, one might advance the general impres-
sion of superficiality and shallow optimism which it creates, and
the fact that it seldom offers any real help in the serious problems
of life. At best it brings palliatives or “first-aid” measures of short
duration. The knowledge and insight imparted by counselling are
little more than the ordinary rule-of-thumb, one might say plati-
tudinous, answers to questions that are generally asked. The ap-
proved and generally accepted answer is what is usually given. Hence
counselling tends to perpetuate a kind of passivity and conven-
tionalism. It tends to encourage conformity to group standards. It
tends to make organization men. Indeed in many cases counselling
is simply the instrument for forming and preserving the mentality
of the organization man. If this estimate is biased and unfair, then

it may be corrected. Salvo meliori judicio731—this is the impression
given by most (secular) counselling.
c) Catholic counselling: counselling in a religious milieu (par-
ticularly Catholic) already partakes of something higher. The
counselling given by the Catholic priest (the term is used for advice
outside the confessional that is not strictly spiritual direction) is on
the ethical plane and very often touches upon the spiritual, or
should do so. There is no harm in a certain amount of psychology
and sociology entering into this kind of advice, provided that the
perspectives of the Gospel and the Church are given first place.
Note: a great deal of Catholic counselling deals in practice with
points of Church Law.
Psychotherapy: whereas counselling is for the “normal”

person, the “healthy” person, psychotherapy implies that one is
(though not “abnormal”) at least suffering from neurosis. Note:
it is increasingly common for people who are not really “mentally
ill” to consult a psychiatrist. In modern society it is common for
those who function well in most respects to have some neurotic
symptoms or at least “personality problems” and “emotional
problems,” or psychosomatic sicknesses which can be helped by
psychotherapy. No particular social stigma attaches to this kind
of treatment. And the proportion of neurotics in our society is so
high that it would be absurd to draw a strict line between them
and “healthy people,” and make a big issue out of which side of
the line one happens to be on. Indeed some who are most con-
vinced that they are not and could not be neurotic are often much
more so than others who are aware of neurotic symptoms. In a
word, there is nothing wrong in experiencing neurotic symptoms,
and realizing their nature, nor is this something to be feared as
somehow “ominous” and portending great evil. It can be said
731. “unless a better conclusion can be drawn” (a standard principle in

theological reasoning: cf. PL 66, col. 290; 78, cols. 448, 583; 153, col. 751; 186, col.
1045).
that the majority of men in our society at one time or other ex-
perience these symptoms and difficulties, but learn how to handle
them. It is only the person who is completely incapable of han-
dling these difficulties in a valid and mature fashion, who really
becomes mentally ill. Neurotic symptoms {include} perfection-
ism, obsessions, compulsions, scruples, diffuse anxiety, severe
uncharitableness.
Psychotherapy differs from counselling in that:

a) it presupposes at least a slight degree of neurosis, and goes
deeper into the personal problem of the patient.
b) it not only offers advice, but the therapist “works through”
the problem with the patient, aiming at giving him a completely
new insight into his situation. The personal relationship between
the psychiatrist and his patient is much deeper and more intimate
than that of the counsellor who simply proffers advice, exteriorly.
c) the success of therapy depends on the patient identifying
himself with the therapist so as to see his problem from the thera-
pist’s point of view. Also in general it can be said that this iden-
tification is important to open up in the patient a deeper appreciation
of “the other” person as a person in his own right, and not just an
extension of one’s own thoughts, fears and desires.
Hence in psychotherapy the relationship of the patient and the
therapist is both important and significant. It is essential. The
aim of therapy is to “heal” (to some extent) traumatic wounds in
the psyche by bringing them to conscious awareness and show-
ing the patient how to deal with them in a rational and mature
fashion, instead of by subconscious and infantile subterfuges,
which do not work.
Psychoanalysis: analysis is a special form of therapy which
goes much deeper than ordinary therapy, and generally takes
longer. It is much more detailed. It strives to be much more radi-
cal, and it aims at a more intimate reshaping of the personality.
Therapy aims simply at restoring the balance of the psyche by
bringing certain unconscious problems to awareness and by
dealing with them rationally. Analysis aims rather at a reshaping
of the self. Freudian analysis generally strives to achieve this by

following the problem back to its earliest roots and bringing the
patient to “live through” an early stage of his pre-rational life
when his development was blocked and “regressed.” The em-
phasis is on the sexual development that takes place uncon-
sciously in infancy and early childhood. Jungian analysis
emphasizes more the primitive archetypal religious symbols
which belong to the collective unconscious and have been inher-
ited by the entire human race. It seeks to awaken the dormant
power of these symbols and bring it into effective play in the
psychic life of the patient, whereas in the sick man the unconscious
power of the symbol tends to be working against him rather than
for him. In analysis the relation of the patient to the analyst is
even more important than it is in therapy, because the work to
be done is more prolonged and is carried out on a deeper level.
Direction differs from all these in ways which should
be immediately obvious. The counsellor concerns himself with
the externals of social life and with its surface. The director is
concerned with the spiritual depths of the person, and with his relation
to God Who calls him to his supernatural end, sanctity and divine
union. The therapist and analyst concern themselves with more
or less disordered conditions in the psyche, with the mental and
psychological health of the patient. The therapist is not concerned
with sin as sin, but with the maturity with which the patient is
able to face responsibility for sin. Naturally, in so far as the thera-
pist recognizes his own moral responsibility to the patient, he
will orient his therapy in an ethical context. Hence the therapist
and analyst by no means replace the director. They are concerned
with the pre-spiritual realm. They are concerned with the mature
growth of the psychic and emotional organism, which is neces-
sary for a fully healthy and mature moral and spiritual life.
At the same time, the director does not replace the therapist in
the case of a neurotic or psychotic. It is erroneous to say that the
psychological difficulties of a neurotic can simply be
settled in the confessional or in spiritual direction, by
ascetic means. {The} reason {is} because ascetic means and to
some extent even the sacraments depend for their full efficacy on
a healthy psyche. The neurotic is so dominated by unconscious
drives that he is not able to judge certain spiritual problems in a
mature manner. His judgement is falsified, in spite of all his sin-
cere efforts, by passions which dominate him without his knowl-
edge. He is necessarily biased. And he is led to choose the wrong
means or to use the right means wrongly. His ascetic efforts, how-
ever well meant, tend inevitably to strengthen his neurosis instead
of liberating his spirit. Hence whatever he does tends to aggravate
or at least to maintain his condition of psychological immaturity
and his lack of spiritual freedom. This may be especially true in
his relations with his director. Hence a neurotic and well-meaning
person in religion, with a director who knows nothing of this
problem, may in his very relations with his director, and in his
efforts to attain to sanctity, actually worsen his condition by the
means which are meant to solve it and bring him liberty.
In resumé, the director is concerned not merely with ethical,
social, and psychological problems. He deals with these only in-
directly. He is concerned with spiritual problems above all, and
spiritual growth. He is concerned with the soul’s response to grace,
and its fulfillment of its vocation in the Church of God, the Body
of Christ. He is concerned with the growth of the soul in holiness and
charity. He is concerned with the action of the Holy Spirit in the
soul. He is concerned with the way the soul makes use of spiritual
means of perfection, the sacraments, prayer, virtues, asceticism,
etc. His relations with the penitent are spiritual. That is to say they
must be seen in the light of faith. The director is the mouthpiece
of God and of the Church, the instrument of the Holy Spirit. The
Holy Spirit Himself, speaking interiorly, confirms the judgements
of the director given exteriorly and moves one to docility and love.
Hence the attitude of the one directed is not merely prudential as in
the case of one receiving counsel, but it is also supernatural and
spiritual, and God Himself is involved in the direction situation.
II. Does the director have any use for psychology? Though not
directly concerned with therapy or analysis,
1) the director should have enough understanding of these

to know when a penitent is neurotic, and when he needs to be
referred to a psychiatrist. N.B. the Holy Office (1961) has recom-
mended a certain amount of caution in referring religious to
psychoanalysts (especially Freudian) without a sufficiently seri-
ous reason.732 Permission of the bishop is required, for non-ex-
empt religious.
2) the director may himself find a knowledge of psychology
and psychoanalysis helpful, indirectly, in the exercise of his own
functions:
A. in evaluating the qualities, defects, temperament, charac-
ter of the penitent. (It is very important to understand at the
outset the capacities of the penitent and his ability to receive direc-
tion; hence, what kind of direction to give him, what way to lead
him. {It is} useless to spend a lot of time and effort in giving him
advice he cannot understand, will not accept, or cannot put into
practice at all. In practice much of the effort of direction, in the
beginning, is in preparing the penitent for direction, gradually. This
is especially true in the novitiate. What {the} father master gives
is really a preparation for direction, at least in the first months.
Sometimes one never really gets around to direction in the no-
vitiate, strictly speaking. It is also important to know enough
psychology to evaluate rapidly and accurately the character one
deals with, without having to go into minute investigations and
long drawn-out questioning about the past, which is tedious and
wearisome to the penitent. One needs to understand him not
only by what he tells you but by the way in which he does, and
by the other ways in which he reveals himself unconsciously.
N.B. in evaluating the strong and weak points of character, often
it is the weak spot that is surrounded with the most emphatic talk
732. “Acta SS. Congregationum Suprema Sacra Congregatio S. Officii Moni-

tum” (July 15, 1961), in Acta Apostolica Sedis, 53 (1961), 571: “Sacerdotes et utri-
usque sexus Religiosi psychoanalystas ne adeant nisi Ordinario suo gravi de causa per-
mittente” (“Priests and religious of either sex should not consult psychoanalysts
except for serious reasons and with the permission of their bishop”).
and rationalization. The penitent may really be weakest and most

deficient where he has the most idealism and where he thinks he is
strong. On the other hand, certain weaknesses, which he thinks
he has to combat, are often quite illusory, and his efforts tend to
overcompensation rather than to realistic grappling with life.)
B. Psychology may help the director to spare his penitent much
useless labor and suffering.
C. Psychology can help the director understand the way the
individual functions in relation to the community, how under
pressure of communal action he loses personal initiative and can
function only as {a} member of {a} group. {There is a} need to
know group psychology (especially in monastic-cenobitic life), and
to know when an individual will profit by collective life as it really
is (not as the ideal paints it) and where it will do him harm. {A}
problem {arises} where an ideal is put forward not because it is
really desired but because it is “correct.” {This is part of the}
ambiguity of community life.
D. In practice, the director needs to know the psychological
weaknesses that arise precisely in the area of culpability, because
the penitent will be talking about what he considers to be his faults
and the obstacles to union with God. He may have a healthy and
realistic view of sin, or he may have a morbid, unhealthy, or un-
reliable view. Types of weakness in the subjective evaluation of sin
and guilt {include}:733
1. Neurasthenic: when they feel threatened by {a} fault {or
by} guilt, oppressed by constant anxiety and fatigue, the subject
feels that almost everything is too much for him, especially where
decisions are involved. He has the feeling that he is being rushed into
everything before he is able to decide. Everything to him is doubtful
and uncertain, and his conscience always bothers him; he is never
secure in a feeling of being clearly right or wrong. Hence {he has}
doubts, scruples, hesitations, confusion. Avoid letting these get
733. See Joseph MacAvoy, “Direction Spirituelle: IV. Direction Spirituelle

et Psychologie,” DS 3, cols. 1149–51.
involved in psychology and self-examination. {This would be

the} worst possible thing—{it} only increases the agony. If they
can get interested in the present reality of the life, and work at it
contentedly, without care for past or future, if they can forget
themselves to some extent and love others and stop pondering
over their “problems,” they can make it in a monastery—other-
wise not. Firm, paternal, kind, patient support from {the} director is
essential. A typical case {is that of} Fr. Joseph Cassant.734
2. Schizoid: {one who} isolates himself from others by barriers
of silence, indifference, hardness of heart, criticism, abstract and le-
galistic thought, intense rationalization, non-participation, cold-
ness, lack of interest. Such ones are usually attracted to our life and
don’t belong in it. False asceticism is common in this type.
3. Cyclothymic: {these exhibit an} alternation of exaltation
and depression. When exalted {they are} ebullient, overflowing
{with} exaggerated joy, volubility, but also {characterized by a}
lack of moral control, {which} can “permit” much dubious activ-
ity without qualms of conscience—{there is a} tendency to laxity
at such moments. {This is} followed by depression, deep melan-
734. Blessed Joseph Cassant (1878–1903) was a French Cistercian of the

Monastery of Sainte Marie du Désert near Toulouse, who was beatified by Pope
John Paul II on October 3, 2004. Merton wrote a preface for a French biography
of Cassant, which was published in 1961: Dom M.-Étienne Chenevière, ocso,
L’Attente dans le Silence: Le Père Marie-Joseph Cassant, o.cist.s.o., Préface de Thom-
as Merton (Paris: Desclée de Brouwer, 1961), 9–13; for the original English ver-
sion, see Thomas Merton, “Father Joseph Cassant, ocso,” The Merton Seasonal,
28.4 (Winter 2003), 3–5, in which Merton writes of Cassant’s relationship with
his novice master and spiritual father, Dom André Malet, as “the one excep-
tion that brings relief to his life of frustration, . . . the one great positive factor
in his monastic life. . . . Through Dom André Malet the Church, the Mother
of Souls, sweetly embraced this helpless child and filled his life with the radi-
ance of Christ: and this was what he needed. He needed mercy, he needed the
assurance of God’s inexhaustible pity and grace. He needed to know that his
poverty did not matter because grace is given most abundantly to those who
have nothing else. Dom André told him all this many times over, and perhaps
after a very long time Père Joseph dared to understand it. If he is a saint, then
this is his sanctity” (4–5).
choly and despair, which can be dangerous especially in our life.

False mysticism easily occurs in this type. Note that the extremes
are really attempts to handle {a} sense of guilt. {The director
should} try to lead {these} to a realistic and calm, hopeful state
of stability and humility.
4. Paranoid: {this state is marked by a} superinflation of the
ego, delusions of grandeur and {an} appetite for domination, or
else delusions of being a “misunderstood genius,” {along with}
stubbornness, bitterness, constant fault-finding and agitation to
denounce and punish others, {as well as} playing politics and
“plotting.” These should not remain in the monastery; they cause
infinite trouble and upset whole communities. {Such a one} proj-
ects his guilt on others. In mild forms the sickness can be helped
if the person can become humble and charitable.
5. Hysterical: {these} easily become false visionaries; {they are}
histrionic, carried away by false raptures in {a} search for attention
or applause; {they are} highly suggestible. Is this a form of anguish
resulting from a hypersensitivity about their difference from others
(in matter of temperament)? ({This is the} solution suggested by
MacAvoy, following Hesnard: Univers Morbide de la Faute.735)
In general, all these types will react unfavorably the more
stress there is on faults. {The} neurasthenic, crushed by guilt,
seeks consolation {and} tends to hang in desperation on {the}
director’s neck; {he} may get into {the} routine of being pardoned
and exempted—“acting out.” {The} schizoid {becomes} with-
drawn, gloomy, critical, {marked by} abstraction, uncharitable-
ness, negativism. {The} cyclothymic {has a} grand opera {response
of} exaltation, {assuming his} fault {is} permitted. {The} paranoid
fights back with plots, protean activism, {a} sinister {attitude
marked by} legitimizing of hatred. {Both the schizoid and the
paranoid} project guilt: {they} act out by moving against or away
from others.
735. Angelo Hesnard, L’Univers Morbide de la Faute (Paris: Presses Univer-

sitaires de France, 1949), cited in MacAvoy, col. 1149.
III. Practical use of this psychological knowledge
Some general “don’ts”:

1. {It is} useless just to say “it is all imagination,” or “it is all
in your head,” or to appeal to use of the will, or strong ascetic
means. Their problem tends to be all mixed up in the very idea
of their religious life itself. Don’t try to dismiss it all with a wave
of the hand. They do not properly understand themselves or their
vocation.
2. Don’t be maneuvered into the position of approving what-
ever their neurosis dictates.
3. Don’t try to bluff. Don’t try to kid them.
4. Don’t try to be a psychiatrist if you are not one.
Some basic procedures (for {the} director):

1. Truth: again, whatever is clearly true must be emphasized,
defended and kept fully in view. They must be guided by truth.
But don’t insist that something you want to be true is necessarily
true. Be honest yourself! Break through illusory ideas of religious
life and vocation. Oppose all fakery and artificiality.
2. Love: you must take {a} real interest, must really esteem,
value and encourage all the good that is in them. You have to be
on the side of the truly valid forces in their character. In asking
{for} sacrifices, make them see that what they ought to give up, if
possible, is their neurotic way of acting. But you cannot force or
cajole them to do this. Favor and encourage all that is genuinely
human. Avoid a false supernaturalism. Encourage a productive and
fruitful regime, whether in work or reading or prayer. Encourage
humility in the form of a realistic appreciation of truth and love
of others.
3. {The} director should help the penitent to take a realistic
and sensible view of temptation—not becoming terrified of his in-
stincts, not seeking to escape from them, and not building false virtues
on repressions (v.g. not thinking humility is {a} sense of inferiority).
Such false virtues are always threatened, and arouse anxiety and
strain, because of artificiality.
4. {The} director should oppose tendencies to obsession and

compulsion:
a) Obsession poisons {one’s} whole life with preoccupation
with one’s “problems.” Everything seems to be a reference to
“my problem.” Everything arouses the doubt and the question,
and the anguish of “the problem.” One tries to avoid these stimuli
and retreats more and more for “safety.” {The} remedy {is} to face
normal realities without fear, but not imposing too much burden
on the weak.
b) Compulsion {involves} pseudo-duty, a mechanical, pseudo-
magic rite to exorcise anxiety. {This brings} momentary relief,
followed by shame at {an} awareness that one has after all been
a little ridiculous (going back again to see that the light is really
out, etc.).
{The} director must also recognize a certain stubbornness and
rigidity in {the} penitent’s clinging to a false value; {an} insistence
on a demand to do this or that penance can be a fruit of infantile
egoism. In all these things what is needed is a real sense of love
and devotion to real values and persons, not imaginary spirituality
and devotion to fictions dictated by fear of anxiety.
5. The crises of the spiritual and affective life: {there are} decisive
steps in {the} evolution of life, some of them at normal stages of
growth: childhood, adolescence, middle age. Others {come} under
pressure of circumstances: sickness, vocational crisis, change of
superiors and employments, wars, expulsion from {the} monas-
tery, destitution, etc. Very often {there is a} crisis as a result of unjust
treatment by others, even in {the} monastery—the “raw deal.”
This is soft-pedaled for obvious reasons, but it may be very real.
{The} basic principle {is that} a crisis is engendered by the anxiety
of division and disproportion between one’s habitual norms, personal
or social, and by the evolving structure of one’s inner life. Psy-
chologically the most important function of the director is to help
the penitent fully to be himself. This means helping him to recon-
cile the divisions in himself, especially by encouraging him to
recuperate and salvage really good and necessary elements in his
life which, for various reasons, he is rejecting. In the contempla-

tive life one of the main duties of the director is to see that the
penitent does not compel himself to throw away the best in him-
self, because he is afraid of it or cannot handle it.
Let us consider the big crises which arrive at moments of
division due to growth. Examples {include}:
The adolescent is accustomed to standards of behavior of
childhood but his body, his emotions, his self are all becoming
different and are exerting the pressure of demands he does not
understand and cannot easily cope with. (N.B. this is not an
“awakening of sex”: the infant already knows sensual pleasure
connected with sex organs but is not aware of it because {it is}
superficial.)
The young man accustomed to his ideas and aspirations for
a career in the world finds himself evolving, interiorly, towards
a religious vocation. Lack of unity and harmony between his
external situation and the demands of his inner self tends to reject
one or the other—his worldly self or his religious self.
In the vocation crisis, there is very often a serious problem of
interpretation of the “new” element that is developing. Often the
vocation idea is so conventional that it is an evasion, not a solu-
tion. One tries to “tag” the new development conveniently and
accurately, for instance by joining the teaching order by which
one was educated, ignoring the fact that the whole problem may
be much more subtle and delicate.
{In a} vocational crisis in {the} monastery, the structure of rules,
norms, ideals ceases to correspond entirely with the evolution of
the inner self:
a) Perhaps because of infidelity or imprudence, the young

monk has let himself be influenced by desires and aspirations
incompatible with monastic life; or he has relaxed his energy and
zeal, lost some of his faith in the monastic ideal as it is correctly
embodied in his community. There may be a lot of rationalization
and false idealism in this: the monastery itself may be unjustly
blamed. Sometimes also there is a real lack of adaptation, {of} a
real evolution beyond the simple norms accepted in the commu-

nity; {there is} a need for something more. This may be a point where
the director can play a crucial part. The main thing is to lead the
penitent to take the necessary forward step, kindly and patiently. The
Christian principle is that here we have the familiar pattern of
“death” and “resurrection” to enter into a new area of life, a pascha
Christi! {The} problem {is to effect} a real integration of the devel-
oped inner self and the outer reality, a new adjustment that retains
what was good and valid before, but casts off what has now be-
come obsolete—perhaps a sane rejection of a burden of artificiality
and illusion that can no longer be borne. In some cases a complete
sacrifice of a cherished attachment that has become a fatal menace
{is needed}. This may quite usually be the case here. In any case
it is a matter of resolute acceptance of the simple realities of the case,
in a spirit of poverty, humility and trust in Providence (not just
stultified and inert passivity!). A crisis that has been gone through
successfully and healthily is a victory and a step forward in holiness and
spiritual maturity. A crisis that has been weathered badly, with
equivocation and evasion of the issue, leaves a wound, weakens
the spiritual energy of the monk, lowers his general tone, de-
creases his capacity for growth, and in the end, a series of badly
handled crises can lead to {a} complete loss of vocation.
b) {A} crisis {may occur} after ordination: due to our priestly
formation, oriented toward administration of {the} sacraments
and care of souls, at least implicitly, the monk may undergo a
crisis of letdown when he is left to himself in the common life, after
years of study, with “nothing to do.” The fault lies with our edu-
cation of priests and with the weak development of {a} monastic
and contemplative spirit in the students. Crises arise from {a}
disproportion between secret hopes and {the} actual situation,
which frustrates them. Vain hopes must not be aroused.
c) The crisis of full development: according to the theories of
Jung,736 man develops full maturity according to the following
736. See MacAvoy, cols. 1154–56.

pattern—without necessarily subscribing to everything said by

Jung we can however adopt the essentials of this pattern as re-
vealing for our monastic situation:
1. {The} first stage {involves} the sacrifice of individual ele-

ments in order to become a persona, socially speaking—to inte-
grate oneself in the monastic community, the exterior world.
{There is an} emphasis on regularity, conforming to visible ideals
and models. This implies the rejection of many capacities and
qualities, the sacrifice of important parts of our self, which are
not useful for this. But the integration must be made. The sacrifice
is required.
2. {The} second stage involves the reintegration in one’s ma-
ture life of what was originally set aside or sacrificed, {which is}
now reintegrated on a higher level. {There is} a reconciliation of
the real and personal depths of the individual with his social and
exterior self (not just a rejection of the latter, either!). Genuine peace
depends on this reconciliation. An imperfect reintegration keeps the
senior religious dry and superficial, restless, melancholy, with
very little to give to his younger brethren. Here above all the director
must gently aid in a complete recovery of all that is humanly best
and vital in the penitent: warmth, geniality, {an} ability to love
and to give. This will help forestall {the} danger of involutional
melancholy.
XII. The Spiritual Direction of Contemplatives (continued):

Direction in the Crises of the Mystical Life
What has been said in the last series of conferences (XI) is
not directly concerned with the guidance of mystics or of “spiri-
tual men.” However, very important matters which indirectly
affect this question have been taken up. Now, briefly, due to our
own lack of knowledge and competence, we can touch on some
matters concerning the spiritual direction of contemplatives in
times of crisis in the spiritual life. We repeat that the fundamental
principles laid down by the Fathers, which we have examined
earlier in the series of these conferences, should guide the director

in his contacts with the mystical life, the life of the Holy Spirit in
Christians reaching their full maturity as members of Christ, and
therefore fully participating in His sufferings and His risen life,
while still on earth. The direction of “mystics” is therefore to be
regarded not as an esoteric specialty, but it is intimately con-
nected with the Christian life as a whole, the Christian life
preached by the Gospel, imparted by faith and the sacraments,
and lived in liturgical mysteries by the whole Church. We shall
here touch on a few classic examples of “crises” of growth in the
mystical life and consider the part played in these by directors.
St. Teresa of Avila and her directors: we shall consider
the experience of St. Teresa and note the conclusions she herself
drew, in regard to spiritual direction.
I. The experience of St. Teresa, with directors, in time of crisis:
the fullest exposition of the crises of the mystical life is in the
Sixth Mansions (Interior Castle). This is the longest section in the
Castle (about 60 pp.; {the} Fifth Mansion, {on the} prayer of union,
is 20 pp. long, {while the} Fourth Mansion, {on the} prayer of
recollection and quiet, is 16 pp. long737). The Sixth Mansion ex-
plains in some detail the exterior and interior trials of the final
purification of the mystic, who has reached union with God, and
is being prepared for the mystical marriage. Also it treats of the
supernatural experiences, visions, etc. which are likewise part of
this preparatory stage, in her case at least. Note: concerning the
Fourth Mansion St. Teresa says it is the “one which the greatest
number of souls enter”738—presumably contemplatives. Concern-
ing the Fifth she says, “the majority manage to get inside”:739 this
seems excessive until we reflect that she distinguishes between
the prayer of union, an experience not granted to all, and the equiva-
lent union of wills in charity which is substantial perfection (see
737. Complete Works of Saint Teresa, 2.269–328, 247–68, 230–46, respectively.

738. Interior Castle, IV.3 (Complete Works of Saint Teresa, 2.246).
739. Interior Castle, V.1 (Complete Works of Saint Teresa, 2.247).
above740). She is saying that most Carmelites reach what is sub-

stantially the perfection of union with God by love, though not
all experience it in prayer (integral perfection). As to the Sixth
Mansion, the way of special purificatory trials and of visions,
unusual experiences, she says: not all souls will be led along
this path.741 That is to say, not all will have the intense sufferings
which are probably the lot of those who are called to the highest
mystical life. But it is normal for all contemplatives to have pe-
riods of crisis and suffering, and in these crises there will be some
elements analogous to those of the higher kind of purification,
especially the exterior trials.
What we shall be doing then is not regarding the mystical
life and its trials in esoteric isolation, as a very special area, but
we shall be in reality considering the whole spiritual life from
the point of view of the higher purifications which de jure742 should
be passed through before one attains to perfect holiness and
likeness to Christ.
a) Read {the} introductory passage, chapter 1 of {the} Sixth
Mansions:
Oh, my God, how great are these trials, which the soul will
suffer, both within and without, before it enters the sev-
enth Mansion! Really, when I think of them, I am some-
times afraid that, if we realized their intensity beforehand,
it would be most difficult for us, naturally weak as we are,
to muster determination enough to enable us to suffer them
or resolution enough for enduring them, however attrac-
tively the advantage of so doing might be presented to us,
until we reached the seventh Mansion, where there is noth-
ing more to be feared, and the soul will plunge deep into
suffering for God’s sake. The reason for this is that the soul
740. See the quotation from Interior Castle, V.3 (Complete Works of Saint Teresa,
2.259-60) above, page 249.
741. See Interior Castle, VI.1 (Complete Works of Saint Teresa, 2.270), which
reads: “Not all souls, perhaps, will be led along this path, . . . ”
742. “in principle”.
is almost continuously near His Majesty and its nearness

brings it fortitude. I think it will be well if I tell you about
some of the things which I know are certain to happen here.
Not all souls, perhaps, will be led along this path, though
I doubt very much if souls which from time to time really
taste the things of Heaven can live in freedom from earthly
trials, in one way or in another. Although I had not intended
to treat of this, it has occurred to me that some soul finding
itself in this state might be very much comforted if it knew
what happens to those whom God grants such favours, at
a time when everything really seems to be lost (from ch. 1,
Sixth Mansion; pp. 269-70, Peers translation).
{There are} two kinds of trials: exterior and interior. The exterior
are the “least” of them.
1) Here we see the experience of Teresa herself, the “outcry”
of good people against her.743 She scandalizes pious and well-
meaning souls. They think she is extreme, that she is deluded
(especially in her attempts to reform Carmel, but also her mystical
life is somewhat publicized).
2) Especially pressure is brought on her confessors. (This of
course is altogether irregular and unjustified.)
3) She is abandoned by friends, everyone becomes suspi-
cious of her, and many confessors refuse to have anything to do
with her—or at least it seems likely that this may eventually
happen.
In the Life (c. 28; p. 184 ff.), she recounts how the saintly
Father Balthasar Alvarez sustained her in her trial when she was
first having visions and people were criticizing her on all sides.
This is an important and beautiful passage:
a) The confessor suffers himself very much. He does not have

the same experience and yet he believes she is to be supported.
But he is also humble and does not trust his own opinion.
743. Interior Castle, VI.1 (Complete Works of Saint Teresa, 2.270).

b) She and the confessor are both attacked; heavy pressure

is brought to bear.
c) In spite of all the difficulties, he is faithful to his trust and
stands by her.
This is an example of the special difficulties in the life of one

called to direct someone with a great and extraordinary mystical
vocation with a providential task in the Church. Fr. Balthasar
Alvarez met the responsibilities of his task.
However, other confessors were not so helpful. In {the} Sixth
Mansion (p. 272), she speaks of the anguish caused by incompe-
tent confessors who do not know how to handle the situation:
a) {A} confessor who is “scrupulous and inexperienced . . .

thinks nothing safe.” {He} cannot face the responsibility of deal-
ing with “anything out of the ordinary.”
b) Above all he does not understand that imperfection can
coexist in the soul of the contemplative with mystical graces. “He
thinks that people to whom God grants these favors must be
angels . . . ”
c) This being the case, he tends to judge that her experiences
are either psychotic delusions or produced by the devil.
d) She goes to him for encouragement and enlightenment,
and he condemns her. Naturally she cannot help taking his judge-
ments seriously, especially since she is influenced by the aware-
ness of her own imperfection. Yet at the same time the power of
grace is indubitable (at the moment of the experience) so that she
is torn between these two forces. Afterwards, however, aridity
descends upon her, {so that} she “wonders if she has ever known
God or will ever know Him.”744 Then she is troubled by the
thought that “she cannot be describing her case properly . . .
has been deceiving her confessor.”745 Summary of the situation:
744. Interior Castle, VI.1 (Complete Works of Saint Teresa, 2.273), which reads
“the soul feels as if it has never known God and never will know Him.”
745. Text reads “. . . has been deceiving him.”
read p. 273.746 In this spiritual tempest no consolation is

possible.
This is a typical case, one which must have reproduced itself
thousands of times over in a less marked or extreme way, since
that time. What can the ordinary director learn from this? Two
things are essential in dealing with extraordinary cases:
a) Recognize one’s own limitations. {Do} not judge prema-
turely. Know where to consult for further information. Know
when to refer the person to someone who is better informed or
more competent. Get permission to consult someone who has
special qualifications, if necessary—permission of the penitent
is meant here.
b) Never act in a violent or negative way that simply pro-
duces turmoil and confusion. Give whatever comfort and support
you can, without committing yourself to the support of what may
be an illusion. Take your stand on the truth; say what you can
say; don’t say what you don’t know. If you don’t know, say you
don’t know and give what help you can.
c) Positive direction is to {be} given. How? by emphasis on
the fundamental and ordinary values of the Christian faith which
are always valid for everyone: namely the theological virtues,
trust in divine Providence, humble obedience to God in all defi-
nite expressions of His will. Often the best direction possible,
even of the most difficult mystical problem, is a clear insistence
on these fundamentals, in a way that applies to the reality of the
case concerned.
Hence it is that if one is called upon to give direction in an

extraordinary case, one should first of all realize that one is speak-
746. Merton has just quoted from this passage, which concludes, “For
there are many things which assault her soul with an interior oppression so
keenly felt and so intolerable that I do not know to what it can be compared,
save to the torment of those who suffer in hell, for in this spiritual tempest no
consolation is possible.”
ing as a minister of the Church, that God’s grace will sustain our
own weakness and supply for our deficiencies, and then in a
spirit of humility and truth give principles based on the Gospels
and the teachings of the Church, that apply as nearly as possible
to the case in hand. The penitent, meanwhile, should not have a
fixed idea of what kind of direction is to be expected, before it is
given. {He} should approach the director with a completely open
mind and in a condition of frankness, humility and readiness to
comply in a spirit of faith with any directives given, until it be-
comes absolutely clear that they are perhaps not the right ones.
Even following directives that are not the right ones can lead to
God. One must be humble, detached, and willing to advance in
the obscurity of faith.
II. Further extraordinary cases: St. Teresa takes up the question
of direction in cases of “interior locutions,” raptures, visions. She
also considers the possibility of psychotic delusions. In {the} Sixth
Mansions (pp. 280 ff.), she speaks first of true locutions, that are
“from God,” and of the interior authority by which they make
themselves known. Then she takes up those which come from
the imagination (282, 283), particularly “dreamlike” ones that
occur deep in the prayer of quiet. She also says to beware of locu-
tions from the devil, but does not say how they are to be identi-
fied in this place. However this leads her to the principle that
whatever may be the nature of the locutions, even if there are appar-
ent signs that they come from God, one should always consult a
director “if what is said is of great importance and involves
some action on the part of the hearer, or matters affecting
a third person.”747 She considers it “very dangerous”748 for a
person to simply follow one of these locutions and trust in his
own opinion without consulting a director. The director in turn
should have great prudence. Later (p. 317), she insists on the
importance of those receiving special favors of this kind “speak-
747. Interior Castle, VI.3 (Complete Works of Saint Teresa, 2.283) (emphasis
added).
ing very plainly and candidly”749 to their director: “Unless you

do this I cannot assure you that you are proceeding as you
should or that it is God Who is teaching you. God is very
anxious for us to speak candidly and clearly to those who are in
His place, and to desire them to be acquainted with all our
thoughts, and still more our actions, however trivial these may
be. If you do this, you need not be disturbed, or worried, for, even
if these things are not of God, they will do you no harm for you
are humble and have a good conscience.”750 (Read context.751)
N.B.: since we are on the subject of locutions, it would be
well to refer to the classic treatment of the subject by St. John of
the Cross in The Ascent of Mt. Carmel, Book II. {The} general theme
of Book II of the Ascent {is that} faith is “night” to the soul,752 and
faith alone leads to the “highest contemplation.”753 Consequently
all clear apprehensions and forms of knowledge and understand-
ing, even though of a supernatural character, must be set aside
in favor of faith, if we are to attain to perfect union with God.
Chapters 16-20 deal especially with “imaginary visions”; chapter
23 ff. deals with spiritual visions; chapters 28-31 deal with interior
locutions. He repeats his principle: his aim is to “direct the soul,
through all its apprehensions, natural and supernatural, without
deception and hindrance, in purity of faith, to Divine union with
749. The text reads “you should speak to your confessor very plainly and
candidly . . . ”
750. Interior Castle, V.9 (Complete Works of Saint Teresa, 2.318), which reads
“. . . with our actions . . . be not of God . . . if you are humble . . . ” (emphasis
added).
751. Teresa goes on to warn her sisters not to despise visions but not to
seek after them, and tells of those who desire not to receive consolations so as to
love God with complete detachment (Complete Works of Saint Teresa, 2.318-20).
752. See the title of c. 3: “How faith is dark night to the soul. . . . ” (Complete
Works of Saint John of the Cross, 1.70).
753. See the title to c. 4: “Treats in general of how the soul likewise must be in
darkness, in so far as this rests with itself, to the end that it may be effectively guided by
faith to the highest contemplation” (Complete Works of Saint John of the Cross, 1.73).
God” (vol. I; p. 208).754 He distinguishes three kinds of locutions:

successive (c. 29), formal (c. 30), substantial (c. 31). Successive
{are} those which we form for ourselves in meditation and recol-
lection, but which are so helped by grace that it is possible to
consider them as “from God.” {John indicates} how they can be-
come obstacles, especially if they give rise to vanity and are taken
too seriously. (Read p. 211,755 213,756 {showing} how the devil in-
tervenes in these). Formal are directly communicated from “an-
other” without any work on the soul’s part, and regardless of
whether one is at prayer or not. Dangers are detailed. {The} con-
clusion (p. 218) {is that} a learned director must be consulted. (Read
p. 218757 and refer back to chapters 17-20 of Book II for further
754. Text reads “. . . direction of the soul, . . . deception or hindrance

. . . ” (Bk. II, c. 28).
755. “For, if humility and charity be not engendered by such experiences,
and mortification and holy simplicity and silence, etc., what can be the value of
them? I say, then, that these things may hinder the soul greatly in its progress to
Divine union because, if it pay heed to them, it is led far astray from the abyss of
faith, where the understanding must remain in darkness, and must journey in
darkness, by love and in faith, and not by much reasoning” (Bk. II, c. 29.5).
756, “In this type of locution—namely, in successive interior words—the
devil intervenes frequently, especially in the case of such as have some inclina-
tion or affection for them. At the time when such persons begin to be recol-
lected, the devil is accustomed to offer them ample material for distractions,
forming conceptions or words by suggestion in their understanding, and then
corrupting and deceiving it most subtly with things that have great appearance
of truth” (Bk. II, c. 29.10).
757. “But the words must be repeated to an experienced confessor, or to a
discreet and learned person, that he may give instruction and see what it is well
to do, and impart his advice; and the soul must behave, with regard to them, in
a resigned and passive manner. And, if such an expert person cannot be found,
it is better to attach no importance to these words and to repeat them to nobody;
for it is easy to find persons who will ruin the soul rather than edify it. . . . And
let it be clearly noted that a soul should never act according to its own opinion
or accept anything of what these locutions express, without much reflection and
without taking advice of another” (Bk. II, c. 30.5-6).
details.758) Substantial {are} the most powerful and efficacious of

supernatural communication, by “words” in which not so much
the word as the reality itself seems present in the spirit. One such
word “works greater blessing in the soul than all that the soul
has itself done throughout its life.”759 These are subject to special
principles. They come from God, but even then {one must} nei-
ther desire them nor not desire them; do not attempt to put them
into effect: God will put them into effect; {one should} not reject
them, but remain in great humility. They help greatly for union
with God. In actuality these are closely akin to graces of union
and are not words that are “heard” in a physical sense. St. Teresa,
in Mansions Six, chapter 3, mentions also these three kinds of
locution (see first paragraph).760 Then she explains that “formal”
locutions, which even “seem to be uttered by a human voice,”761
are heard by persons afflicted by melancholy, by which she means
neurotics or psychotics. What to do with these? Take no notice
of their locutions. Do not scold these people or upset them by
telling them it comes from the devil. Listen patiently and quietly
tell them to pay no attention, explaining that “the service of God
does not consist in things like these.” {Do} not tell them they are
crazy “for then there will be no end to it” as they will “simply
swear” that they see and hear these things, which, subjectively,
they do. “The real solution is to see that these persons have
less time for prayer . . .”762 and distract them by sane and
758. St. John himself advises the reader (Bk. II, c. 30.7; 1.218) to refer back
to these chapters (1.138-62), which point out that even authentic visions may do
harm without proper discernment and wise spiritual direction.
759. Complete Works of Saint John of the Cross, 2.219 (Bk. II, c. 31.1), which
reads “works a greater blessing within . . .”
761. Interior Castle, VI.3 (Complete Works of Saint Teresa, 2.279); Teresa does
not use the term “formal” here, which is that of John of the Cross.
762. Interior Castle, VI.3 (Complete Works of Saint Teresa, 2.280); “for then” is
not found in the text and emphasis is added.
healthy activity, a lighter regime, etc. (See other places in St. Te-
resa: vide index.763)
St. John of the Cross: Direction in the dark night: St.
John of the Cross attaches crucial importance to two crises in the
spiritual life, one of which is simply a preliminary to the other.
They both are called “dark night.” The first is the “night of sense”
which brings one to the maturity of the spiritual life, and the
second is the “night of the spirit” which brings one to the perfec-
tion of the mystical life. These nights are both “active” and “pas-
sive.” The “stripping” and “annihilation” of sense and spirit are
accomplished in part by one’s own efforts, in union with grace,
but chiefly by the infused action of God. It is one of the characteristic
doctrines of St. John of the Cross that unless one is passively puri-
fied of all imperfections by the divine action, one cannot attain per-
fectly to union with Him; also, that our cooperation, which is
absolutely necessary, consists more in disposing ourselves to accept
God’s action, without placing obstacles in His way, rather than
in any positive action of our own (on the higher levels—in the
lower levels of the spiritual life the initiative belongs to us, and
this must not be neglected; if one is not generous in sacrifice in
the beginning, one cannot go on to the more difficult and mys-
terious work of cooperating with the mystical purifications sent
by God). It follows then that once there is a definite indication
of a call to higher forms of prayer it is most important that obstacles
be removed. Among the chief obstacles are the wrong notions en-
tertained by the contemplative himself, the ignorance and arbitrariness
of his director, and the intervention of the devil. In this connection
it is best simply to look at some texts from St. John of the
Cross.
763. There is an extensive listing under “Locutions” (Complete Works of

Saint Teresa, 3.389-90).
1. The Prologue to The Ascent of Mount Carmel

N. 3: a) he laments the fact that when souls are brought to
the dark night by God, and are thus invited to perfect union with
Him, they “make no progress.”764
b) Why? “At times it is because they have no desire to enter
it or to allow themselves to be led into it . . . or because they
understand not themselves and lack competent guides and
directors.”765
And so it is sad to see many souls to whom God gives both

favour and capacity for making progress (and who, if they
would take courage, could attain to this high state), re-
maining in an elementary stage of communion with God,
for want of will, or knowledge, or because there is none
who will lead them in the right path or teach them how to
get away from these beginnings. And at length, although
Our Lord grants them such favour as to make them to go
onward without this hindrance or that, they arrive at their
goal exceeding late, and with greater labour, yet with less
merit, because they have not conformed themselves to God,
and allowed themselves to be brought freely into the pure
and sure road of union. For, although it is true that God
is leading them, and that He can lead them without their
own help, they will not allow themselves to be led; and
thus they make less progress, because they resist Him Who
is leading them, and they have less merit, because they ap-
ply not their will, and on this account they suffer more. For
there are souls who, instead of committing themselves to
God and making use of His help, rather hinder God by the
indiscretion of their actions or by their resistance; like chil-
dren who, when their mothers desire to carry them in their
arms, kick and cry, insisting upon being allowed to walk,
764. Complete Works of Saint John of the Cross, 1.12.

765. Complete Works of Saint John of the Cross, 1.12, which reads “. . . this is
because . . . at other times, because they understand not themselves and lack
competent and alert directors who will guide them to the summit.”
with the result that they can make no progress; and, if they
advance at all, it is only at the pace of a child.766
Summary: {there are} three lacks which prevent people from

entering into the dark night, presuming they are called to it: lack
of will, lack of understanding, lack of guidance. (This seems to
imply that all receive the grace. This is not necessarily to be con-
cluded. He is speaking of cases where he believes the grace has
been given but the soul was not able to correspond fully for the
above reasons.) Where correspondence is only partial or imper-
fect, there is less merit, there is more suffering, {and} the advance
is either very slow or non-existent.
N. 4: hence, he says, he is writing “this book” “to the end
that all, whether beginners or proficient, may know how to commit
themselves to God’s guidance, when His Majesty desires to lead
them onward . . . ”767 so that they may be able to understand His
will or at least allow Him to lead them.
For some confessors and spiritual fathers, having no light

and experience concerning these roads, are wont to hinder
and harm such souls rather than to help them along the
road; they are like the builders of Babel, who, when told to
furnish suitable material, gave and applied other very dif-
ferent material, because they understood not the language,
and thus nothing was done. Wherefore, it is a difficult and
troublesome thing at such seasons for a soul not to under-
stand itself or to find none who understands it. For it will
come to pass that God will lead the soul by a most lofty
path of dark contemplation and aridity, wherein it seems
to be lost, and, being thus full of darkness and trials, af-
flictions and temptations, will meet one who will speak to
it like Job’s comforters, and say that it is suffering from
766. Complete Works of Saint John of the Cross, 1.12, which reads “. . . high
estate), . . . ”
767. Complete Works of Saint John of the Cross, 1.12-13, which reads “. . .
proficients . . . ” (emphasis added here and throughout passages quoted from
this source).
melancholy or low spirits, or morbidity of temperament,

or that it may have some hidden sin, and that it is for this
reason that God has forsaken it. Such comforters are wont
to infer immediately that that soul must have been very
evil, since such things as these are befalling it.768
2. Ascent of Mount Carmel, II, chapters 12 to 15: one of

the great questions raised and treated by the Carmelite mystics
is the question of a crisis in the spiritual life which marks the
passage from “ordinary” prayer to “mystical” prayer. The very
idea of the passage has become fraught with controversy, and
the question of acquired contemplation (whether such a thing
exists or not) has been regarded as technically important to this
problem. Without entering into the discussion {of} acquired vs.
infused contemplation, it may be said that the notion of acquired
contemplation may perhaps have been brought into the picture
in order to reduce the intensity of the crisis. It might seem to be a
way of softening the shock of division, the passing over of an
abyss, by putting a kind of bridge over it, an intermediate stage,
thus creating a sense of confidence and courage in the new con-
templative, reassuring him that he is not totally out of his depth.
This may or may not be a valid assumption. St. John of the Cross
in any case treats the passage from discursive prayer to begin-
ners’ contemplation as a “critical” moment in the spiritual life.
We shall see that he is especially aware of the fact that the direc-
tor, by taking a wrong view of what is taking place, prevents and
obstructs the “passage” into the new level by restraining the peni-
tent and holding him back on the ordinary level, forcing him to
produce the familiar and conventional acts which he is now
called to leave. It is necessary then to see briefly in what the crisis
consists, and what are the signs that the soul is truly called to a
higher kind of prayer and is consequently in “crisis” and needs
the special help that is called for, in the night of sense.

In the Ascent, Book II, St. John concentrates on the aspect of

the night of sense in prayer (this is only part of the problem, not
the whole story). He also considers it from the active point of
view only: how to cooperate with God by not placing obstructions,
and he especially indicates the signs by which one may know
that it is safe and right to proceed from discursive to contempla-
tive prayer.
1) What causes the crisis? the passage from discursive and
affective prayer to another form of prayer, contemplation, which
is silent, apparently inactive, receptive, “passive.” In particular
the crisis is caused by one entering into a way of prayer in which
his faculties are obstructed and cease to act in their ordinary way
as means to prayer and fervor. On the contrary, they tend to block
the new, deep prayer infused by God. This applies especially to
the imagination, whether moved naturally or supernaturally (vi-
sions), and the reason, the memory, the will. The ordinary sponta-
neous activity of these faculties is necessary for beginners but
harmful to proficients (i.e. those in whom passive prayer has
begun). (Read Ascent, vol. I, p. 111, 112; esp. n. 6.769)
769. Bk II, c. 12.4-6: after pointing out that, while images of God according
to sense impressions are useful for beginners, God is beyond the grasp of the
senses, he continues, “Great, therefore, is the error of many spiritual persons
who have practised approaching God by means of images and forms and medi-
tations, as befits beginners. God would now lead them on to further spiritual
blessings, which are interior and invisible, by taking from them the pleasure
and sweetness of discursive meditation; but they cannot, or dare not, or know
not how to detach themselves from those palpable methods to which they have
grown accustomed. They continually labour to retain them, desiring to proceed,
as before, by the way of consideration and meditation upon forms, for they
think that it must be so with them always. They labour greatly to this end and
find little sweetness or none; rather the aridity and weariness and disquiet of
their souls are increased and grow, in proportion as they labour for that earlier
sweetness. They cannot find this in that earlier manner, for the soul no longer
enjoys that food of sense, as we have said; it needs not this but another food,
which is more delicate, more interior and partaking less of the nature of sense;
it consists not in labouring with the imagination, but in setting the soul at rest,
and allowing it to remain in its quiet and repose, which is more spiritual.”
2) What constitutes the crisis? the total unfamiliarity and

strangeness of the new state in which one suffers anxiety, an-
guish, hesitation, doubt whether or not to go forward, irresolu-
tion as to how to advance, scruples about whether one is at fault
or not, temptations to go back to what is familiar, pressures of
the director to go back to what is familiar and conventional
though God may be calling and pressing the soul to advance in
this new way which is so mysterious.
3) The crisis is manifested above all by dryness and inability
to produce ordinary acts at prayer, the inability to meditate (when
one has previously been proficient at meditation), a sense that
one’s spiritual life has gone to pieces, an absence of sensible fer-
vor, a deep awareness of one’s own weaknesses, limitations,
failings; perhaps also many temptations of all kinds, which re-
inforce the soul in its mistaken conviction that everything is going
wrong. The efforts of the soul to recover fervor and light only
serve to torment it and increase its anguish, for they are useless.
(Read vol. I, p. 113; n. 7.770)
770. Bk. II, c. 12.7: “It is piteous, then, to see many a one who, though his
soul would fain tarry in this peace and rest of interior quiet, where it is filled
with the peace and refreshment of God, takes from it its tranquillity, and leads
it away to the most exterior things, and would make it return and retrace the
ground it has already traversed, to no purpose, and abandon the end and goal
wherein it is already reposing for the means which led it to that repose, which
are meditations. This comes not to pass without great reluctance and repug-
nance of the soul, which would fain be in that peace that it understands not, as
in its proper place; even as one who has arrived, with great labour, and is now
resting, suffers pain if they make him return to his labour. And, as such souls
know not the mystery of this new experience, the idea comes to them that they
are being idle and doing nothing; and thus they allow not themselves to be
quiet, but endeavour to meditate and reason. Hence they are filled with aridity
and affliction, because they seek to find sweetness where it is no longer to be
found; we may even say of them that the more they strive the less they profit,
for, the more they persist after this manner, the worse is the state wherein they
find themselves, because their soul is drawn farther away from spiritual peace;
and this is to leave the greater for the less, and to retrace the road already tra-
versed, and to seek to do that which has been done.”
4) The crisis must not be confused with similar states of soul

caused by tepidity, negligence, sin, laziness, slackness in the
spiritual life, real lack of fervor, or perhaps melancholy
(neurasthenia).
5) In chapter 13 he explains what are the signs by which one
may know that the vocation to simple contemplation is genuine
and that the time has come to lay aside meditation. This is the active
cooperation of the soul, God having already begun to produce
passively, by dryness and infused light “which is darkness to the
soul”771 the conditions requisite for contemplation and indeed the
beginning of contemplation (whether you choose to call it ac-
quired or infused). He makes it clear that it is of great importance
to lay aside the practices of meditation neither sooner nor
later than when the Spirit bids him (n. 1; p. 114); and it is im-
portant for him not to abandon meditation “before the proper
time lest he should turn backward.”772 This is very important, because
unless this distinction is made, anyone who gets the idea that
passive prayer is a “good thing” and “better than ordinary prayer”
may take it upon himself to abandon meditation and then end up
with no prayer at all, since he was not called to do this by God.
One should therefore know the indications that one may
safely go forwards in “the night.” He gives three signs. The three
signs are:
a) {an} inability to meditate discursively or affectively,
though this was possible, easy and fruitful in the past; lack of
pleasure in the meditation that previously brought sweetness.
771. See Ascent, Bk. II, c. 3: “Hence it follows that, for the soul, this exces-
sive light of faith which is given to it is thick darkness, for it overwhelms that
which is great and does away with that which is little, even as the light of the
sun overwhelms all other lights whatsoever, so that when it shines and disables
our powers of vision they appear not to be lights at all. . . . It is clear, then, that
faith is dark night for the soul, and it is in this way that it gives it light; and the
more it is darkened, the greater light comes to it” (Complete Works of Saint John of
the Cross, 1.70, 72). See also Dark Night, Bk. II, c. 5 (1.406).
772. Complete Works of Saint John of the Cross, 1.114-15 (Bk. II, c. 13.1).
Note {the} crucial importance of the fact that he could meditate

before but now can no longer. He had fervor and consolation
before, but now finds aridity precisely where before he found consola-
tion. This is essential to the “crisis” of the night of sense.
b) no desire to fix the mind or imagination or senses on any
particular object, “whether exterior or interior.”773 But the imagi-
nation still works, and indeed produces distractions. These add
to the suffering and aridity of the crisis. It is not an inability to fix
{the} mind on any particular thing, but a sense of alienation from
particular objects as particular, and a movement toward the mys-
terious reality of God in a general, confused, dark apprehension
of love, not under the form of precise and clear ideas.
c) “The soul takes pleasure in being alone, and waiting with
loving attentiveness upon God, without making any particu-
lar meditation, in inward peace and quietness and rest,
and without any acts and exercises of the faculties,”774 at
least without discursive acts, that is, without passing from
one thing to the other. All these elements are very impor-
tant—this is a positive sign, the other two being negative.
The three signs must all be present together. The first alone,
inability to meditate, may proceed from distraction and careless-
ness. When it does, there is a definite inclination to other particu-
lar objects. The second and first, inability to meditate plus distaste
for particular objects, indifference, apathy, might proceed from
“melancholy,” which can produce a “certain absorption”775 and
torpor of the senses, which may even be enjoyable. It is not con-
templation. St. Teresa also warns against this.776 The third sign,
positive inclination for loving attentiveness to God in solitude
reads “. . . no desire to fix his meditation or his sense upon other particular
objects, exterior or interior.”
reads “. . . and waits . . . without acts . . . ”
775. Complete Works of Saint John of the Cross, 1.116-17 (Bk. II, c. 13.6).
776. See Interior Castle, IV.3 (Complete Works of Saint Teresa, 2.245-46).
and quiet, in a general but very definite and positive way, is

decisive.
These signs should be known by directors. A vague aware-
ness that there exists such a thing as passive and contemplative
prayer, that it is a prayer without work of the imagination and
faculties, but a failure to understand these precise requirements,
leads many to encourage immature and unformed souls to en-
gage in empty daydreaming and torpor or sleepiness. This pre-
vents the real development of the interior life. What is important,
then, is that one be ready and disposed to respond to the call of
the Holy Spirit whenever and wherever He invites the soul to
enter into this quiet, solitary and passive recollection, and that
for this end one should be detached, free, unencumbered by
particular objects of thought and concern, and by all particular
attachments. More important, however, the director must not
impede the advance of the soul called by God to this passive
prayer.
3. The Living Flame, Book III: the effects of bad direction: the
soul in aridity and “night,” which is necessary for purification,
comes to someone who insists that this is the result of sin or some
other natural cause—laziness, tepidity, melancholy. Inexperi-
enced and rigid directors tell the soul “that finds no consolation
in the things of God”777 to retrace its steps. They thus retard the
soul and “double its miseries”778 by increasing the load of suffer-
ing and self-reproach (cf. what was said above by St. Teresa779).
“They make these souls go over their lives and cause them to
777. Complete Works of Saint John of the Cross, 1.13 (Ascent, Prologue 5),
which reads: “And there will likewise be those who tell the soul to retrace its
steps, since it is finding neither pleasure nor consolation in the things of God as
it did aforetime.”
which reads: “And in this way they double the trials of the poor soul; for it may
well be that the greatest affliction which it is feeling is that of the knowledge of
its own miseries, . . . ”
make many general confessions and crucify them afresh.”780 The

great fault of these confessors is that they trust in their own
methods and know only one kind of (active) spirituality. They
insist on forcing the soul to conform to the “books.” They have
no respect for the individual needs of the soul. They have no re-
spect for or knowledge of the divine action. And St. John of the
Cross insists on the preciseness and efficacy of this mysterious
action of God, working secretly in the soul, unperceived, some-
times in great suffering. “These blessings [in contemplative
prayer, even though arid] are inestimable; for they are most
secret and therefore the most delicate anointings of the
Holy Spirit, which secretly fill the soul with spiritual
riches and gifts and graces; since it is God Who does all
this, He does it not otherwise than as God . . .” (Living
Flame, III.{40}; p. 182).781 Read also Living Flame, III.41782 (these
anointings {are} understood neither by the soul nor by the direc-
tor but only by God). (But the slightest active intervention of the
soul can spoil the work of God. Naturally this applies only to
passive and mystical prayer and the director must know what
this is.) Read idem, {n.} 42:783 the great harm done—God’s work
which reads: “such confessors, thinking that these things proceed from sin,
make these souls . . . ”
781. Copy text reads: “39”; text reads “But the blessings . . . are, as I say,
inestimable; . . . the most secret . . . ”
782. Complete Works of Saint John of the Cross, 3.182: “These anointings, then,
and these touches, are the delicate and sublime acts of the Holy Spirit, which, on
account of their delicate and subtle purity, can be understood neither by the soul
nor by him that has to do with it, but only by Him Who infuses them, in order
to make the soul more pleasing to Himself. These blessings, with the greatest
facility, by no more than the slightest act which the soul may desire to make on
its own account, with its memory, understanding or will, or by the applications
of its sense or desire or knowledge or sweetness or pleasure, are disturbed or
hindered in the soul, which is a grave evil and a great shame and pity.”
783. Complete Works of Saint John of the Cross, 3.182-83: “Ah, how serious
is this matter, and what cause it gives for wonder, that the evil done should be
imperceptible, and the hindrance to those holy anointings which has been in-
defaced. {N.} 43: how great this evil is and how common—the
“spiritual blacksmiths” who chide the contemplative for idleness
in his prayer because he is not constantly “making acts,” “doing
something.” “These other things are the practices of illuminists
and fools.”784 {N.} 44: to make the soul “walk in sense”785 when
God is leading it passively in the ways of the spirit is to make it
go backwards. {N.} 46: especially, “Let them not, therefore,
merely aim at guiding these souls according to their own
way and the manner suitable to themselves, but let them
see if they know the way by which God is leading the soul
and if they know it not, let them leave the soul in peace
and not disturb it” (p. 184{-85}).
These spiritual directors such as we have been describing

fail to understand souls that have attained to this solitary
and quiet contemplation, because they themselves have
not arrived so far, nor learned what it means to leave be-
hind the discursive reasoning of meditations, as I have
said, and they think that these souls are idle. And there-
fore they disturb and impede the peace of this quiet and
hushed contemplation which God has been giving their
penitents by His own power, and they cause them to fol-
low the road of meditation and imaginative reasoning and
terposed should be almost negligible, and yet that this harm that has been done
should be a matter for greater sorrow and regret than the perturbation and ruin
of many souls of a more ordinary nature which have not attained to a state of
such supreme fineness and delicacy. It is as though a portrait of supreme and
delicate beauty were touched by a coarse hand, and were daubed with coarse,
crude colours. This would be a greater and more striking and pitiful shame than
if many more ordinary faces were besmeared in this way. For when the work of
so delicate a hand as this of the Holy Spirit has been thus roughly treated, who
will be able to repair its beauty?”
784. Complete Works of Saint John of the Cross, 3.183, which reads: “there will
come some spiritual director who has no knowledge save of hammering souls
and pounding them with the faculties like a blacksmith, . . . ‘. . . Get to work,
meditate and make interior acts, for it is right that you should do for yourself
that which in you lies, for these other things . . . ’”
make them perform interior acts, wherein the aforemen-

tioned souls find great repugnance, aridity and distrac-
tion, since they would fain remain in their holy rest and
their quiet and peaceful state of recollection. But, as sense
can perceive in this neither pleasure nor help nor activity,
their directors persuade them to strive after sweetness and
fervour, though they ought rather to advise them the con-
trary. The penitents, however, are unable to do as they did
previously, and can enter into none of these things, for the
time for them has now passed and they belong no more to
their proper path; but the penitents are doubly disturbed
and believe that they are going to perdition; and their di-
rectors encourage them in this belief and bring aridity to
their spirits, and take from them the precious unctions
wherewith God was anointing them in solitude and tran-
quillity. This, as I have said, is a great evil; their directors
are plunging them into mire and mourning; for they are
losing one thing and laboring without profit at the other
(Living Flame, III.53).786
How then, we may ask, if you are only a hewer of wood,
which signifies that you can make a soul despise the world
and mortify its desires; or, if at best you are a carver, which
means that you can lead a soul to holy meditations but can
do no more: how, in such a case, will this soul attain to the
final perfection of a delicate painting, the art of which con-
sists neither in the hewing of the wood, nor in the carving
of it, nor even in the outlining of it, but in the work which
God Himself must do in it? It is certain, then, that if your
instruction is always of one kind, and you cause the soul
to be continually bound to you, it will either go backward,
or, at the least, will not go forward. For what, I ask you,
will the image be like, if you never do any work upon it
save hewing and hammering, which in the language of the
soul is the exercise of the faculties? When will this image
be finished? When or how will it be left for God to paint it?
Is it possible that you yourself can perform all these offices,
786. Complete Works of Saint John of the Cross, 3.189-90.

and consider yourself so consummate a master that this

soul shall never need any other? (ibid., 58).787
Good Direction {includes}:

1) Recognition of God’s action, acceptance of the fact that
when He works, no intervention of ours can be of help, but will
only hinder. (See {the} Prologue to Ascent, p. 14: “Their penitents
should be left to the purgation which God gives them, and
be comforted and encouraged to desire it until God be pleased
to dispose otherwise; for until that time, no matter what the souls
themselves may do and their confessors may say, there is no rem-
edy for them.”) The whole book of the Ascent and the Dark Night
is concerned with instructions on the points mentioned here.
2) The director must be humble and detached from his own
methods and acutely attentive to the divine action, objectively,
and he must not attempt to impose a program of his own, no
matter how much official approval this program may have.
3) The prudent director will try to understand “the way and
the spirit by which God is leading” the soul, and in conformity
with this way and spirit, to guarantee the following, as far as
possible: solitude (interior but also to some extent exterior); tran-
quillity, liberty of spirit, “a certain freedom so that the bodily
and exterior senses may not be bound to any exterior thing
. . . ”; 788 liberation from prescribed forms of prayer, even litur-
gical, though of course the obligation to participate in public
prayer theoretically remains: but it can be fulfilled in solitude, in
certain clear cases, which may however remain quite extraordi-
nary. The norm {is} to fulfill all the communal obligations, but in
a spirit of liberty and interior freedom, without constraint or
pressure. “Let them strive to disencumber the soul and set it in
a state of rest, in such a way that it will not be bound by any kind

788. Complete Works of Saint John of the Cross, 3.185 (stanza 3.46), which
reads: “. . . so that the spiritual and bodily senses may not be bound to any
particular thing, either interior or exterior . . . ”
of knowledge above or below [spiritual or material] or be fettered

by any covetousness of any sweetness or pleasure or any other
apprehension, but that it will be empty and in pure negation with
respect to every creature and will be established in poverty of
spirit” (vol. III, p. 185).789
Note: {one must} distinguish between pure negation and mere
negation. Pure negation is actually in the highest sense positive,
a recovery even of all created values in the light of God, darkly.
Mere negation is simply the exclusion and negation of the crea-
ture, which in the first place is impossible, and in the second only
encloses the mind in itself, which is disastrous. He says790 that
this is willed for us by Christ (Luke 14:33: “he that doth not re-
nounce himself in all things cannot be my disciple”). This means
not only surrender of material things but “the surrender of spiri-
tual things, wherein is included poverty of spirit, in which, says
the Son of God, consists blessedness” (p. 185). What is the value
of this surrender? It is the cooperation demanded of the soul. If
the soul surrenders everything, “It is impossible that God
should fail to perform His own part by communicating
Himself to the soul, at least secretly and in silence.”791
N.B.: this has definite quietistic implications if it is not under-
stood in the real sense in which it is intended by St. John of the
Cross. He is referring to one who has clearly been called to in-
fused prayer and has generously disposed himself by previous
practice of meditation and active forms of prayer, with self-de-
nial. It is not to be taken to mean that anyone, without previous
formation, has simply to empty his mind and God will immedi-
ately fill it.
789. Text reads: “. . . bound to any particular kind of knowledge, either
above or below, . . . by covetousness . . . empty in pure . . . ”
791. Text reads: “it is impossible, if the soul does as much as in it lies, that
God . . . ” (Note that the omitted clause speaks to the implications of quietism
mentioned in the following sentence.)
Summary: the work of the director is to lead the soul to this

full surrender and freedom of spirit, according to its own capaci-
ties, in the way of evangelical perfection, “which is detachment
and emptiness of sense and spirit.”792 This must be brought about
by quietness and love, not by force and imprecations. When the
soul is thus empty, it does not need to “do anything” further, for
God will act in it, says St. John of the Cross (p. 186).793
Oh, souls! Since God is showing you such sovereign mercies

as to lead you through this state of solitude and recollec-
tion, withdrawing you from your labours of sense, return
not to sense again. Lay aside your operations, for, though
once they helped you to deny the world and yourselves,
when you were beginners, they will now be a great ob-
stacle and hindrance to you, since God is granting you the
grace of Himself working within you. If you are careful to
set your faculties upon naught soever, withdrawing them
from everything and in no way hindering them, which is
the proper part for you to play in this state alone, and if
you wait upon God with loving and pure attentiveness, as
I said above, in the way which I there described (working
no violence to the soul, save to detach it from everything
and set it free, lest you disturb and spoil its peace and tran-
quillity) God will feed your soul for you with heavenly
food, since you are not hindering Him (65; p. 197).
The soul in this state of quiet must bear in mind that,
although it may not be conscious of making any progress
or of doing anything, it is making much more progress
than if it were walking on its feet; for God is bearing it in
His arms, and thus, although it is making progress at the
792. Complete Works of Saint John of the Cross, 3.186 (stanza 3.47), which
reads: “. . . of sense and of spirit.”
793. Text reads: “For if it is true that it is doing nothing, then, by this very
fact that it is doing nothing, I will now prove to you that it is doing a great deal.
For . . . the more it empties itself of particular knowledge and of the acts of
understanding, the greater is the progress of the understanding in its journey to
the highest spiritual good.”
rate willed by God Himself, it is not conscious of move-

ment. And although it is not working with its own facul-
ties, it is nevertheless accomplishing much more than if it
were doing so, since God is working within it. And it is not
remarkable that the soul should be unable to see this, for
sense cannot perceive that which God works in the soul at
this time, since it is done in silence; for, as the Wise Man
says, the words of wisdom are heard in silence. Let the
soul remain in the hands of God and entrust itself neither
to its own hands nor to those of these two blind guides; for,
if it remains thus and occupies not its faculties in anything,
it will make sure progress (67; p. 198).
This is clarified by further statements of principle: the intel-

lect must not be forced to work, because the soul approaches God
by faith. (Hence a distinction is necessary, for faith is a work of
the intellect as well as the will, but on a level above discourse.)
“It is a progress in darkness for faith is darkness to the under-
standing.”794 Even though the understanding is darkened the will
is not idle. It may be moved by God without knowledge, “just as
a person can be warmed by a fire without seeing the fire” (188).
In this way the will may oftentimes feel itself to be enkin-

dled or filled with tenderness and love without knowing or
understanding anything more distinctly than before, since
God is introducing love into it, even as the Bride says in the
Songs, in these words: The King made me enter the cellar of
wine, and ordained love in me. There is no reason, therefore,
to fear that the will may be idle in this case; for, if of itself it
leaves performing acts of love concerning particular kinds
of knowledge, God performs them within it, inebriating it in
infused love, either by means of the knowledge of contem-
plation, or without such knowledge, as we have just said;
and these acts are as much more delectable and meritorious
than those made by the soul as the mover and infuser of this
love—namely, God—is better than the soul (III.50; p. 188).
794. Complete Works of Saint John of the Cross, 3.187 (stanza 3.48).
God causes the acts of the natural faculties to fail (charac-

teristic of St. John of the Cross) in order to work in them Himself
in a way that is not apprehended (p. 190). Finally, of great impor-
tance: the director must not put obstacles in the way of ascent to a
higher and more contemplative form of life when there are signs that a
vocation to higher contemplation exists (see especially p. 194795).
4. The Dark Night of the Soul: we will here briefly summa-
rize the main ideas of this classic of the mystical life which is
most characteristic of St. John of the Cross. First of all, it must
not be regarded as a separate treatise. It forms one single work
with The Ascent of Mount Carmel. It is in reality the second part
of a diptych, the Ascent dealing with the active purification (night)
of sense and spirit. The Dark Night deals with passive or mystical
purification. The Ascent is the asceticism of purification; the Dark
Night is the mystical treatment of the same. Note therefore that
of all ascetic writers St. John of the Cross really has the least to
say and places the least emphasis on exterior works of mortifica-
tion, and the most to say about interior detachment, giving the
greatest place to the work of the theological virtues and the pas-
sive activity of the Holy Spirit.
Book I of the Dark Night deals with the night of sense. Where
does the night of sense come in the spiritual life? It is a transition
by which one passes from the “state of beginners . . . which is
the state of those who meditate, to the state of contemplation,
which is for the proficient.”796 We have already considered the
active aspect of this sufficiently and need not insist further. Chap-
ters 2 to 7 are however important. Here he runs through the
795. Stanza 3.62.

796. Complete Works of Saint John of the Cross, 1.350 (Dark Night, 1.1), which
reads: “Into this dark night souls begin to enter when God draws them forth
from the state of beginners—which is the state of those that meditate upon the
spiritual road—and begins to set them in the state of progressives—which is
that of those who are already contemplatives—to the end that, after passing
through it, they may arrive at the state of the perfect, which is that of the Divine
union of the soul with God.”
“spiritual vices,”797 that is to say, the capital sins, as they are found
on a deep spiritual level, not formal sins but principles of semi-
deliberate sin and imperfection which keep a man back from true
progress. This section can profitably be read by everyone. Every
director should know these chapters well. The principle laid
down is characteristic: after the description of each spiri-
tual vice, he reminds the reader that it cannot be got rid
of except by passive purification. This is crucial for the under-
standing of St. John of the Cross. In reality he does not insist as
strongly as some think on active works of mortification (though
asceticism and self-denial are absolutely essential). His true stress
is on passive purification. Two important corollaries {are}:
a) no amount of active ascetic effort can substitute for passive
purification;
b) an unwise insistence on active asceticism can actually in-
terfere with and impede the really important action of inner
passive purification operated in the soul by the Holy Spirit.
{For} examples of the spiritual vices, see: p. 351 (n. 3);798 pride: p.
352, 354, 356;799 spiritual gluttony re communion (p. 366; n. 5800).
797. See Dark Night, Bk. 1, c. 2.2 (Complete Works of Saint John of the Cross,
1.352), which reads: “For the devil knows quite well that all these works and
virtues which they perform are not only valueless to them, but even become
vices in them.”
798. This section discusses ascetical practices engaged in by beginners in
the spiritual life for the sake of the consolation and pleasure they bring.
799. In this chapter (Bk. 1, c. 2) John speaks of beginners who take pride
and satisfaction in their own works of piety and despise others who have what
they perceive to be less devotion than themselves (n. 1); who grow despon-
dent about their own imperfections and beg God to take them away, not real-
izing that thereby their pride would increase (n. 5); who are contrasted with the
humble, who acknowledge their own imperfections and are given the grace to
cast out evil from themselves by God, “even as He denies it to the proud.”
800. “These persons, in communicating, strive with every nerve to obtain
some kind of sensible sweetness and pleasure, instead of humbly doing rever-
ence and giving praise within themselves to God. . . . [T]hey have not realized
Chapter 8: here he distinguishes the night of sense from the night

of the spirit. The night of sense {is} a transition from a sensible and
reasonable level to the level where sense is subject to spirit. It is,
strictly speaking, not the true spiritual life but a preparation for it.
{It} is the “adolescence” of the spiritual life. Many enter the night
of sense—it is common; {but} few progress in it. Later he will say
also (Bk. II, c. 3) that the function of the night of sense is to unite
sense and spirit together.801 The night of spirit then brings about
the real deep purgation of both sense and spirit in one. This is important
for a true understanding of St. John. {In} the night of spirit, the true
spiritual life begins: the spirit is subjected to God. “It is the portion
of very few.”802 The distinction has been ignored or overlooked,
says St. John of the Cross: “very little has been said of this.”803
Chapters 9 to 13 {include} further interesting material on the
night of sense, most of which simply elaborates in greater detail
and succinctness the points with which we have become familiar
above, {so that they} need not be treated here. See chapter 10 for
advice on what to do in the night of sense.804 Chapter 11 stresses
the passive elements in the night of sense. Chapter 12 is particu-
larly useful as it lists the benefits of the night of sense. If we are fully
aware of these benefits and convinced of their importance, we
will have less trouble understanding the need to pass through
the night of sense with patience and submission to God. We will
that the least of the advantages which comes from this Most Holy Sacrament is
that which concerns the senses; . . . ”
801. Complete Works of Saint John of the Cross, 1.402, which reads: “These
souls, then, have now become proficients, because of the time which they have
spent in feeding the senses with sweet communications, so that their sensual
part, being thus attracted and delighted by spiritual pleasure, which came to it
from the spirit, may be united with the spirit and made one with it.”
802. Complete Works of Saint John of the Cross, 1.371 (Dark Night, Bk. 1, c. 8.1),
which reads: “The night of the spirit is the portion of very few.”
803. Complete Works of Saint John of the Cross, 1.371 (Dark Night, Bk. 1, c. 8.2).
804. The soul is advised to persevere in patience and trust, remaining in
peace and quietness beyond all thought and knowledge, even though it appears
that it is doing nothing (Complete Works of Saint John of the Cross, 1.378-81).
get a better perspective of what it is all about. The night of sense

brings one to genuine strength and maturity so that one can truly
begin the spiritual life (i.e., mystical life). The benefits are given
precisely when they seem to be taken away. Thus in apparent
anguish and dryness we receive peace and fervor, on a higher
level. The night of sense, while seemingly depriving us of {an}
ability to pray, brings us to a state where we are able to pray
constantly in habitual remembrance of God. Above all it has the
advantage of liberating us from all kinds of interior and subtle
imperfections. This too is important because it makes us see that
we cannot get rid of these imperfections by thinking about them,
examining ourselves and “working at” them. On the contrary
we must in some sense forget them, and let God take them away
in the night of sense. Read pages 392 (nn. 7 to 9)805 and n. 10,806
805. “7. With respect to the imperfections of the other three spiritual sins
which we have described above, which are wrath, envy and sloth, the soul is
purged hereof likewise in this aridity of the desire and acquires the virtues op-
posed to them; for, softened and humbled by these aridities and hardships and
other temptations and trials wherein God exercises it during this night, it be-
comes meek with respect to God, and to itself, and likewise with respect to its
neighbour. So that it is no longer angry with itself and disturbed because of its
own faults, nor with its neighbour because of his faults, neither is it displeased
with God, nor does it utter unseemly complaints because He does not quickly
make it holy. 8. Then, as to envy, the soul has charity toward others in this re-
spect also; for, if it has any envy, this is no longer a vice as it was before, when
it was grieved because others were preferred to it and given greater advantage.
Its grief now comes from seeing how great is its own misery, and its envy (if it
has any) is a virtue, since it desires to imitate others, which is great virtue. 9.
Neither are the sloth and the weariness which it now has concerning spiritual
things vicious as they were before; for in the past these sins proceeded from
the spiritual pleasures which the soul sometimes experienced and sought after
when it found them not. But this new weariness proceeds not from this insuf-
ficiency of pleasure, because God has taken from the soul pleasure in all things
in this purgation of the desire.”
806. “Besides these benefits which have been mentioned, the soul attains
innumerable others by means of this arid contemplation. For often, in the midst
of these times of aridity and hardship, God communicates to the soul, when it is
least expecting it, the purest spiritual sweetness and love, together with a spiri-
{on} how the spiritual vices ({see} above) are purged by aridity,
{and the} summary of purification of sense (p. 394, n. 15)807 {on
the} quieting of {the} four passions of joy, hope, fear and grief.
Book I ends with the thought of transition to the night of spirit
(c. 14). There are references to the special severity of the night of
sense in those who are to pass on to the night of spirit. For others,
the night of sense remains relatively easy. How long must the
night of sense continue? It cannot be said with certainty. This
depends on the vocation of each individual. It may be especially
long for “the weak” who get it in feeble doses, alleviated by
consolations. But also those who are to go on further generally
remain a long time in the night of sense. Some remain always
“neither in the night nor out of it.”808 These statements might be
discussed, but time requires that we pass on.
Book II: the night of the soul: the transition continues.
After “a long time, even years”809 in the night of sense, the soul
tual knowledge which is sometimes very delicate, each manifestation of which

is of greater benefit and worth than those which the soul enjoyed aforetime;
although in its beginnings the soul thinks that this is not so, for the spiritual
influence now granted to it is very delicate and cannot be perceived by sense.”
807. “When, therefore, the four passions of the soul—which are joy, grief,
hope and fear—are calmed through continual mortification; when the natural
desires have been lulled to sleep, in the sensual nature of the soul, by means of
habitual times of aridity; and when the harmony of the senses and the interior
faculties causes a suspension of labour and a cessation from the work of medi-
tation, as we have said (which is the dwelling and the household of the lower
part of the soul), these enemies cannot obstruct this spiritual liberty, and the
house remains at rest and quiet, as says the following line: My house being
now at rest.”
808. Complete Works of Saint John of the Cross, 1.396, which reads: “But those
who are very weak are kept for a long time in this night, and these He purges
very gently and with slight temptations. Such are neither properly in the night
nor properly out of it; . . . ”
809. Complete Works of Saint John of the Cross, 1.398 (Dark Night, Bk. 2, c. 1.1);
the text actually says not that the soul spends years in the night of sense, but
rather that after leaving “the aridities and trials of the first purgation and the
night of sense . . . it is wont to pass a long time, even years, after leaving the
state of beginners, in exercising itself in that of proficients.” Thus St. John does
is prepared for {the} night of spirit. He does not make clear here,
but does elsewhere, that after the night of sense there may be a
period of deeply consoled contemplation and prayer of union
(betrothal). Note however that even when one has reached this,
the purification of the senses is not perfect. The purification of
sense is not really complete until one has passed well into the night
of the spirit. During the consolations of mystical prayer after {the}
night of sense, there are also periods of darkness, renewals of
{the} night of sense, “sometimes more intense than those of the
past,”810 but they are always transient. {The principal} difference
{is that} the darknesses of this period are not continual, as those
of {the} night of spirit are. In this transition period after {the}
night of sense, we run into the “defects of proficients”811 which,
says St. John, require the night of the spirit to be purified. What
are these defects? Through weakness, mystical grace causes ec-
stasies, visions, etc. These are not signs of consummate sanctity,
but rather, in his eyes, signs of weakness and deficiency. The body
is also affected adversely and suffers illness caused by the force
of mystical grace, disrupting the weak organism. Moral imperfec-
tions spring from forms of pride and self-complacency; overcon-
fident in one’s own perfection and overestimating one’s
experience, one can become overfamiliar with God. One can be-
come deceived as to his true state, imagining himself better than
he is, taking himself for a prophet, etc. when he is not. Humility
may suffer greatly, and mysticism may turn to presumption. Note
{the} genuine problem of the mystic who “goes wrong.” {He is}
not strictly a “false mystic,” but he begins to be led by his own
at least suggest here, despite what Merton says in the following sentence, that
the night of sense is followed by a period of contemplative illumination.
810. Complete Works of Saint John of the Cross, 1.398 (Dark Night, Bk. 2, c. 1.1),
which reads: “darknesses and perils which are sometimes much more intense
than those of the past.”
811. St. John speaks of “certain imperfections and perils which belong to
these proficients” (Complete Works of Saint John of the Cross, 1.400; Dark Night,
Bk. 2, c. 1.3).
spirit, and that of his group, and does much harm. All this de-
mands the night of the spirit, “so that one may walk in pure faith
which is the proper and adequate means whereby the soul is
united to God” (c. 2, n. 5).812
Now we come to the classical passages on the night of the
spirit. Let us look at these chapters in a little more detail. {In}
Book II, chapter 4, the dark night is described as “contemplation
or detachment or poverty of spirit, which is here almost one and
the same thing.”813 The dark night is a “going forth from myself
. . . from my poor and limited manner of experiencing God,
without being hindered by sensuality and the devil.”814 Remem-
ber, he is commenting on his own stanzas: “On a dark night,
kindled in love with yearnings—oh, happy chance! / I went forth
without being observed, my house being now at rest.”815
This was a great happiness and a good chance for me;

for, when the faculties had been perfectly annihilated and
calmed, together with the passions, desires and affections
of my soul, wherewith I had experienced and tasted God
after a lowly manner, I went forth from my own human way
and operation to the operation and way of God. That is to say,
my understanding went forth from itself, turning from the hu-
man and natural to the Divine; for, when it is united with
God by means of this purgation, its understanding no lon-
ger comes through its natural light and vigour, but through
the Divine Wisdom wherewith it has become united. And
my will went forth from itself, becoming Divine; for, be-
ing united with Divine love, it no longer loves with its
natural strength after a lowly manner, but with strength
and purity from the Holy Spirit; and thus the will, which
812. Complete Works of Saint John of the Cross, 1.402, which reads: “and be
made to walk in dark and pure faith, . . . ”
813. Complete Works of Saint John of the Cross, 1.404, which reads: “. . .
which here are almost . . . ”
814. Complete Works of Saint John of the Cross, 1.404, which reads: “. . . I
went forth from myself . . . hindered therein by sensuality or the devil.”
is now near to God, acts not after a human manner, and

similarly the memory has become transformed into eternal
apprehensions of glory. And finally, by means of this night
and purgation of the old man, all the energies and affections
of the soul are wholly renewed into a Divine temper and Divine
delight (p. 405).
Comment: note the essential elements of the dark night expressed

here:
a) a going forth from the human way and operation to the
way and operation of God;
b) a total transformation or “divinization” of “all the energies
and affections of the soul”;
c) implicitly this is the fulfillment of the baptismal vocation,
for at baptism grace, and divinization, take possession of the in-
most substance of the soul, but the faculties continue nevertheless
to be capable of sin and even in good actions to proceed in “a
human manner” (i.e. with many imperfections).
Chapter 5, n.1: this dark night is an inflowing of God
into the soul which purges it from its ignorances and im-
perfections, habitual, natural and spiritual (p. 405). It is
called by contemplatives infused contemplation or mystical the-
ology. It is direct and purely supernatural action of God on the
soul, not only purifying but instructing. The purifying power is
the Holy Spirit, and divine love. It is “the same loving wisdom
that purges the blessed spirits and enlightens them.”816 {He con-
siders} why this night causes torment and suffering:
But the question arises: Why is the Divine light (which, as

we say, illumines and purges the soul from its ignorances)
here called by the soul a dark night? To this the answer is
that for two reasons this Divine wisdom is not only night
and darkness for the soul, but is likewise affliction and torment.
The first is because of the height of Divine Wisdom, which tran-

scends the talent of the soul, and in this way is darkness to it; the
second, because of its vileness and impurity, in which respect it is
painful and afflictive to it, and is also dark (p. 406).
He then goes on to develop an extensive philosophical argument,

based on the principle that “two contraries cannot coexist in one
subject,”817 and the purity of God and the impurity of the soul
come into conflict. Also the transcendent greatness of God and
the weakness and limitations of the soul cause conflict when they
are brought face to face. The mere opposition of divine power
and human infirmity causes conflict. Yet this is the merciful love
of God which though it causes suffering does so out of tenderness
and love.
Beneath the power of this oppression and weight the soul

feels itself so far from being favoured that it thinks, and cor-
rectly so, that even that wherein it was wont to find some
help has vanished with everything else, and that there is
none who has pity upon it. To this effect Job says likewise:
Have pity upon me, have pity upon me, at least ye my
friends, because the hand of the Lord has touched me. A
thing of great wonder and pity is it that the soul’s weak-
ness and impurity should now be so great that, though the
hand of God is of itself so light and gentle, the soul should
now feel it to be so heavy and so contrary, though it neither
weighs it down nor rests upon it, but only touches it, and
that mercifully, since He does this in order to grant the soul
favours and not to chastise it (p. 408).
This is the basic pattern, which he goes on to develop with many

illustrations from Scripture and observations from his own ex-
perience. We will simply enumerate some of the points he
raises:
1) The positive aspect of the dark night is stressed. It is a time
of blessings, and although a time of tremendous suffering and
darkness it is also a time of deep inner joy. St. Catherine of Genoa
817. Complete Works of Saint John of the Cross, 1.407 (Dark Night, Bk. 2, c. 5.4).
also says this about the souls in Purgatory.818 The darkness of the
dark night is for the sake of light, the misery for the sake of joy;
hence joy and light and mercy always have the primacy. Indeed
the same light that torments and purifies the soul will also eventu-
ally be the source of its greatest delight (see c. 10, n. 3).819
2) Aspects of the trial (numbers refer to chapters and sections
of Bk. II): it must last several years (7.4); {it is} difficult to believe
the director {who is} offering consolation (7.3); intervals of relief
come, but followed by worse affliction (7.4-6, 10.7-9; 12.1-6); {there
is an} inability to pray or to love (8.1), {an} incapacity for temporal
interests and joys (8.1), {an} annihilation of the intellect, memory
and will (8.2); the simpler the divine light, the more it purifies (8.2).
Read 8.3 (the sunlight in the window)820 {and} 8.4 (emptiness).821
818. See Treatise on Purgatory, chapter 12, entitled, “How Suffering in Pur-
gatory is Coupled with Joy”: “It is true that love for God which fills the soul to
overflowing gives it, so I see it, a happiness beyond what can be told, but this
happiness takes not one pang from the pain of the souls in purgatory. . . . So
that the souls in purgatory enjoy the greatest happiness and endure the greatest
pain; the one does not hinder the other” (Late Medieval Mysticism, 408); similar
statements are found in chapters 2, 5 and 16 (400–401, 403, 410–11).
819. Here St. John uses the famous similitude of the fire which, in trans-
forming the wood into itself, first prepares it for that purpose: see n. 825.
820. Complete Works of Saint John of the Cross, 1.420: “We observe that a ray
of sunlight which enters through the window is the less clearly visible according
as it is the purer and freer from specks, and the more of such specks and motes
there are in the air, the brighter is the light to the eye. The reason is that it is not
the light itself that is seen; the light is but the means whereby the other things
that it strikes are seen, and then it is also seen itself, through its having struck
them; had it not struck them, neither it nor they would have been seen. Thus
if the ray of sunlight entered through the window of one room and passed out
through another on the other side, traversing the room, and if it met nothing on
the way, or if there were no specks in the air for it to strike, the room would have
no more light than before, neither would the ray of light be visible. In fact, if we
consider it carefully, there is more darkness in the path of the ray of sunlight,
because it overwhelms and darkens any other light, and yet it is itself invisible,
because, as we have said, there are no visible objects which it can strike.”
821. Complete Works of Saint John of the Cross, 1.420-21: “Now this is pre-
cisely what this Divine ray of contemplation does in the soul. Assailing it with
A reason for the purgation {is that} one particular affection that re-
mains is enough to impede the whole general joy of the soul in the
“All” (9.2). {There is} “substantial darkness”822 in the substance
of the soul (9.3), anguish, “roaring” (9.7),823 apparent doubt and
despair (9.8-9: read824). Read 10.1-2: the fire and the log of wood.825
its Divine light, it transcends the natural power of the soul, and herein it dark-
ens it and deprives it of all natural affections and apprehensions which it ap-
prehended aforetime by means of natural light; and thus it leaves it not only
dark, but likewise empty, according to its faculties and desires, both spiritual
and natural. And, by thus leaving it empty and in darkness, it purges and il-
lumines it with Divine spiritual light even when the soul thinks not that it has
this light, but believes itself to be in darkness, even as we have said of the ray of
light, which, although it be in the midst of the room, yet, if it be pure and meet
nothing on its path, is not visible.”
824. Complete Works of Saint John of the Cross, 1.427-28: “8. Such is the work
wrought in the soul by this night that hides the hopes of the light of day. With
regard to this the prophet Job says likewise: In the night my mouth is pierced
with sorrows and they that feed upon me sleep not. Now here by the mouth
is understood the will, which is pierced with these pains that tear the soul to
pieces, neither ceasing nor sleeping, for the doubts and misgivings which pierce
the soul in this way never cease. 9. Deep is this warfare and this striving, for
the peace which the soul hopes for will be very deep; and the spiritual pain is
intimate and delicate, for the love which it will possess will likewise be very in-
timate and refined. The more intimate and the more perfect the finished work is
to be and to remain, the more intimate, perfect and pure must be the labour; the
firmer the edifice, the harder the labour. Wherefore, as Job says, the soul is fad-
ing within itself, and its vitals are being consumed without any hope. Similarly,
because in the state of perfection toward which it journeys by means of this pur-
gative night the soul will attain to the possession and fruition of innumerable
blessings, of gifts and virtues, both according to the substance of the soul and
likewise according to its faculties, it must needs see and feel itself withdrawn
from them all and deprived of them all and be empty and poor without them;
and it must needs believe itself to be so far from them that it cannot persuade it-
self that it will ever reach them, but rather it must be convinced that all its good
things are over. The words of Jeremiah have a similar meaning in that passage
already quoted, where he says: I have forgotten good things.”
825. Complete Works of Saint John of the Cross, 1.429-30: “1. For the greater
clearness of what has been said, and of what has still to be said, it is well to
After Book II, chapter 11, he goes into a further treatment of the
more positive aspects and the union for which the soul is being
prepared.
3) Union: the wound of love (c. 11: study and comment).
Note especially, he says that this perfection of pure love is the
true fulfillment of the first commandment which “sets aside noth-
ing pertaining to man.”826 It is very important to stress this here.
This is the recovery, the reintegration of all that is good in man, all
observe at this point that this purgative and loving knowledge or Divine light
whereof we here speak acts upon the soul which is purged and prepared for
perfect union with it in the same way as fire acts upon a log of wood in order
to transform it into itself; for material fire, acting upon wood, first of all begins
to dry it, by driving out its moisture and causing it to shed the water which it
contains within itself. Then it begins to make it black, dark and unsightly, and
even to give forth a bad odour, and, as it dries it little by little, it brings out and
drives away all the dark and unsightly accidents which are contrary to the na-
ture of fire. And, finally, it begins to kindle it externally and give it heat, and at
last transforms it into itself and makes it as beautiful as fire. In this respect, the
wood has neither passivity nor activity of its own, save for its weight, which is
greater, and its substance, which is denser, than that of fire, for it has in itself the
properties and activities of fire. Thus it is dry and it dries; it is hot and heats; it
is bright and gives brightness; and it is much less heavy than before. All these
properties and effects are caused in it by the fire. 2. In this same way we have
to philosophize with respect to this Divine fire of contemplative love, which,
before it unites and transforms the soul in itself, first purges it of all its contrary
accidents. It drives out its unsightliness, and makes it black and dark, so that it
seems worse than before and more unsightly and abominable than it was wont
to be. For this Divine purgation is removing all the evil and vicious humours
which the soul has never perceived because they have been so deeply rooted
and grounded in it; it has never realized, in fact, that it has had so much evil
within itself. But now that they are to be driven forth and annihilated, these hu-
mours reveal themselves, and become visible to the soul because it is so brightly
illumined by this dark light of Divine contemplation (although it is no worse
than before, either in itself or in relation to God); and, as it sees in itself that
which it saw not before, it is clear to it that it is not only unfit for God to see it,
but that it deserves His abhorrence and that He does indeed abhor it. By this
comparison we can now understand many things concerning what we are say-
ing and purpose to say.”
826. Complete Works of Saint John of the Cross, 1.434 (Bk. 2, c. 11.4).
his energies and faculties, and the total consecration of them to

God, purified and divinized. Nothing human is excluded or lost;
all is transfigured. The humanism of St. John of the Cross and of
the Church is here seen at its highest level.
In this way it can be realized in some measure how great

and how strong may be this enkindling of love in the spirit,
where God keeps in recollection all the energies, faculties
and desires of the soul, both of spirit and of sense, so that
all this harmony may employ its energies and virtues in
this love, and may thus attain to a true fulfilment of the first
commandment, which sets aside nothing pertaining to man
nor excludes from this love anything that is his, but says:
Thou shalt love thy God with all thy heart and with all thy
mind, with all thy soul and with all thy strength (p. 434).
This must suffice as our treatment of the great theme of the dark
night. These too brief notes may be enough to enable some to
enter upon a personal study of this classic.
Appendix to Mystical Theology

Appendix I: The Scala Claustralium
The Scala Claustralium sive Tractatus de mode orandi827 (PL
184—note other contents of this volume828) {is} a typical medieval
treatise on the interior life, by Guigo (?) the Carthusian, important
because it is a first-class example of the medieval approach to
lectio, meditatio, oratio, contemplatio,829 and contains not only pure
doctrine but clear examples of the language of medieval spiritu-
ality—largely the language of St. Bernard.
827. The Ladder of Monks, or Treatise on the Way to Pray (PL 184, cols. 475A-
484D).
828. This volume includes works falsely attributed to St. Bernard, includ-
ing sermons by Gilbert of Hoyland, treatises by William of St. Thierry, including
the Golden Epistle, the treatise on Jesus at Twelve Years of Aelred of Rievaulx, and
various other sermons and meditations, most dating from the twelfth century.
829. Col. 475C: “reading, meditation, prayer and contemplation.”
{It opens with the} Epistola ad Gervasium.830 Note {its} brevity,

succinctness, unction: “quoniam de servitute Pharaonis, te delicata
solitudine laudabili furto surripiens, in ordinata castrorum acie collo-
casti; ramum de oleastro artificiose excisum prudenter inserens in
oliva.”831 Chapter 1.2: at manual labor, meditating on {the} spiri-
tual life, he thinks of four steps of a ladder “reaching from earth
to heaven”:832 lectio quaerit—cibum ori apponit—inspectio;833 medi-
tatio invenit—masticat et frangit—studium.834 (Further development
{is found in} chapter 11: by meditation: ruminando succum elicia-
mus; {et} transglutiendo usque ad cordis intima {transmittamus ut}
ex his {diligenter} consideramus statum nostrum et studeamus {eorum}
opera agere.835) Oratio postulat—saporem acquirit—devotio.836 (Special
emphasis {is placed} on prayer because by it we open our heart to
God, and submit, consenting to His grace, and this is essential. Ad
hoc ut fructuosa sit meditatio, oportet ut sequatur orationis devotio,
cujus quasi effectus est contemplationis dulcedo.837) Contemplatio
830. “Letter to [Brother] Gervase” (col. 475BC).

831. Col. 475BC: “because by a praiseworthy theft you have stolen your-
self away from the slavery of Pharaoh in delightful solitude and have placed
yourself in the ordered ranks of the camp; you have prudently grafted onto the
olive tree a branch skillfully cut from the wild olive.”
832. Col. 475C.
833. Col. 476C: “reading seeks—puts food in the mouth—examination”;
the text reads “inquirit” but then, in reference to Mt. 7:7, adds, “Quaerite legendo”
(“Seek by reading”); the final word here, as in the three subsequent groupings,
is adapted from a phrase quoted in full below.
834. Col. 476C: “Meditation finds—chews and breaks up—study.”
835. Col. 481D: “by chewing let us draw out the juice; by swallowing let us
pass it on all the way to the center of the heart so that through these words we
might reflect on our state and be eager diligently to do the same works” (copy
text reads: “eliciamus; transglutiendo . . . transmittimus ex his consideramus . . .
studeamus opera . . . ”).
836. Col. 476C: “Prayer begs—receives a taste—devotion.”
837. Col. 482C (c. 11), which reads: “Ad hoc ergo . . . ”: “And so for medi-
tation to be fruitful, it must be followed by the devotion of prayer, the effect of
which is, as it were, the sweetness of contemplation.”
degustat—est ipsa dulcedo quae jucundat et reficit—dulcedo.838 (See

chapter 12: Lectio sine meditatione arida; meditatio sine lectione, er-
ronea; oratio sine meditatione tepida; meditatio sine oratione, infruc-
tuosa; oratio cum devotione contemplationis acquisitiva; contemplationis
adeptio sine oratione, aut rara, aut miraculosa.839)
Definitions: lectio—sedula scripturarum cum animi intentione
inspectio;840 meditatio—studiosa mentis actio, occultae veritatis noti-
tiam ductu propriae rationis investigans;841 oratio—devota cordis
intentio in Deum pro malis amovendis, et bonis adipiscendis;842 con-
templatio—mentis in Deum suspensae elevatio, aeternae dulcedinis
gaudia degustans.843
End of chapter 2: lectio—how it operates: he takes an ex-
ample of a text from Scripture, “Beati mundo corde.”844 {The} reader
says, “There is something good here,”845 very precious, this purity
of heart, which gives {the} vision of God. Redibo ad cor meum,
et tentabo si forte intelligere et invenire potero munditiam hanc.846 Note
838. Col. 476C: “Contemplation enjoys—it is sweetness itself which de-

lights and revives—sweetness.”
839. Col. 482CD, which reads: “. . . arida est; . . . est tepida; . . . ”: “Read-
ing without meditation is dry; meditation without reading is erroneous; prayer
without meditation is lukewarm; meditation without prayer is unfruitful;
prayer with devotion leads to contemplation; attaining contemplation without
prayer is either rare or miraculous.”
840. Col. 476C (c.1): “reading [is] the careful examination of the scriptures
with an attentive mind.”
841. Col. 476C (c.1): “meditation [is] the diligent activity of the mind, seek-
ing out knowledge of hidden truth under the guidance of one’s own reason.”
842. Col. 476C (c.1): “prayer [is] the fervent focus of the heart on God in
order to banish what is evil and acquire what is good.”
843. Col. 476C (c.1): “contemplation [is] the raising up of the mind beyond
itself to God, tasting the joys of eternal sweetness.”
844. Col. 476D: “Blessed are the pure of heart, [for they shall see God]”
(Mt. 5:8).
845. Col. 477A, which reads: “Potest aliquid boni esse” (“There can be some-
thing good”).
846. Col. 477A: “I shall return to my heart, and see if perhaps I am able to
understand and discover this purity.”
{the} emphasis on returning to the heart, “finding the heart.”

Lectio awakens this desire.
Chapter 3: officium meditationis847 (continues {the} example
{by} meditation on “Beati mundo corde”)—Sedula meditatio, non
remanet extra, interiora penetrat, singula rimatur.848 But note how:
1) by comparison and contrast:
a) what is said and what is excluded (corde—non corpore849);
b) Scripture is brought in to give light (other passages where
cor mundum is used850);
c) seeing the Face of God—contrast the “vile aspect”851 of the
suffering servant and the beauty of God seen by the pure of heart.
2) by summarizing: all satiety {is} included in {the} vision of
God: satiabor, cum apparuerit gloria tua.852 He takes a word of Scrip-
ture which ties all up in one bundle, then comments: Videsne
quantum liquoris emanavit ex minima uva; quantus ignis ex hac scin-
tilla ortus est.853 And yet the well is deep—much more water can
be drawn from it.
Chapter 2, n. 4: spiritual senses begin to come into action:
fracto alabastro suavitatem unguenti praesentire incipit, necdum gustu,
sed quasi narium odoratu.854 This leads to another inference from
847. Col. 477A: “The Exercise of Meditation” (title of c. 3).

848. Col. 477B, which includes an additional phrase between “extra” and
“interiora”: “earnest meditation does not remain on the surface but penetrates to
the center and investigates each particular point.”
849. Col. 477B, which reads: “non dixit, Beati mundo corpore; sed corde” (“It
does not say, ‘Blessed are the pure of body; but of heart’”).
850. Psalm 23[24]:4, Psalm 50[51]:12, but also passages where the precise
phrase is not found (Ps. 65[66]:18; Job 31:1).
851. Col. 477C.
852. Col. 477D: “I shall be satisfied when your glory appears” (Ps.
16[17]:15).
853. Col. 477D: “do you see how much juice has come forth from the
smallest grape; how much fire has sprung up from this spark?”
854. Col. 477D: “when the jar has been broken it begins to make evident
the sweetness of the ointment, not yet by taste, but as though by its fragrance
to the nose.”
the sweetness of the meditation: what must be the sweetness of

the reality experienced. But this in turn leads to conflict and crisis,
{a} sense that one does not have the capacity to attain to such
experience, yet {has a} great desire for it. Habendi desiderio aestuat,
sed non invenit apud se quomodo habere possit: et quanto plus inquirit,
plus sitit. Dum apponit meditationem, apponit et dolorem.855 For the
experience is not to be attained by our own efforts, only through
the gift of God. It is a gift of wisdom—sapidam scilicet scientiam,
quae animam, cui inhaesit, inaestimabili sapore jucundat et ref-
icit.856 The Lord alone gives this wisdom and this experience for
He alone can operate the transformation necessary in the soul
that is to experience divine things. Hic est qui sapientiae saporem
dat, et sapidam animam facit. Sermo siquidem datur multis, sed
sapientia paucis; quam distribuit Dominus cui vult, et quomodo
vult.857
Chapter 4: officium orationis:858 seeing that it cannot attain by
its own action to pray—that is a pure gift—humiliat se et confugit
ad orationem859 (a very Bernardine phrase860). Note the prayer that
flows from the same Scriptural text under consideration. Study
this prayer as {a} typical example of the oratio that flows from
lectio and meditatio. The importance lies in its coherent relation-
ship to the other activities, its use of Scripture to seek God non jam
855. Col. 478A: “It grows warm with the desire to possess, but does not
discover within itself how it can do this; and the more it searches, the greater
it thirsts. All the while it experiences meditation, it is experiencing suffering
also.”
856. Col. 478B: “that sweet-tasting knowledge which rejoices and restores
the soul to which it is joined with unimaginable sweetness.”
857. Col. 478C: “It is he who gives the sweetness of wisdom, and makes
the soul wise. Certainly the word is given to many, but wisdom to few; the Lord
bestows it on whom he wills, and as he wills.”
858. Col. 478C: “The Exercise of Prayer” (title of c. 4).
859. Col. 478C: “he humbles himself and flees to prayer.”
860. See In Psalmo Qui Habitat, Sermo 6.1 (PL 183, col. 197B): “recurrere ad
orationem, refugere ad meditationes sanctas” (“to run back to prayer, to flee back to
holy meditations”).
in cortice litterae, sed in sensu experientiae861 (ergo, experientiae =

“spiritus”)—ending with quia amore ardeo862 (theme song of {the}
twelfth-fourteenth centuries—languor animae amantis863—the
twelfth-century Eros).
Caput 5: officium contemplationis:864 {there is} more on prayer
at {the} beginning of the chapter. Prayer consists in ignitis elo-
quiis865—arousing and expressing love; {and} incantationibus866—
calling the Spouse. God, attracted by prayer, brings consolation
to the soul. N.B. this description does not fit passive or infused
contemplation, but is a kind of active contemplation—at least in
the manner in which it begins. {Its} effects {are} described in {the}
usual language: coelestis rore dulcedinis circumfusus, unguentis op-
timis delibutus: animam fatigatam recreat, esurientem reficit, aridam
impinguat; facit eam [animam] terrenorum oblivisci, memoria sui
[Dei] mirabiliter eam fortificando, vivificando, inebriando et sobria
reddendo.867 {These are} classical terms (comment: memoria [prae-
sentia],868 sobria ebrietas869). Summary: just as in some carnal acts
a man is overcome by flesh {and} ceases to be rationalis, becomes
totus carnalis,870 so in contemplation, consumuntur et {absorbentur}
carnales motus ab anima [cf. night of sense {of} John {of the}
861. Col. 478D: “not in the rind of the letter, but in direct experience.”
862. Col. 478D: “because I burn with love.”
863. See above, n. 517.
864. Col. 479A: “The Exercise of Contemplation” (title of c. 5).
865. Col. 479A: “burning words.”
866. Col. 479A: “addresses.”
867. Col. 479A, which reads: “. . . et facit . . . eam mirabiliter . . . et inebri-
ando ac sobriam . . . ”: “sprinkled with the dew of heavenly sweetness, steeped
in the finest ointments: he renews the weary soul, restores the hungry soul,
nourishes the dry soul; he makes it oblivious of earthly things; he strengthens
and enlivens it wondrously with the memory of God, inebriating it and making
it sober again.”
868. “memory”; “presence”: the connection is obscure, but Merton per-
haps intends to point out that memory has the power to make the past present
and so effective in the soul now.
869. See above, n. 185.
870. “rational . . . totally fleshly.”
Cross871], ut in nullo caro spiritui contradicat; et fiat homo totus spiri-

tualis872 (cf. St. Bernard on Wisdom: Sermo 85 in Cantica873).
Chapter 6: signs of the coming of the Spirit (cf. St. Bernard
in Cantica874): the interior baptism of tears ({note the} quotations
from {the} psalms). Si adeo dulce est flere pro te, quam dulce erit
gaudere de te?875 (again memoria {as} presentia). {Then follows a}
digression: why speak of these things? Legis in libro experientiae:876
a Bernardine expression877—letter and spirit, the inner gloss and
commentary of the heart.
Chapter 7: then the spouse withdraws (vicissitudo);878 the
sweetness of contemplation departs. [Sponsus] manet tamen prae-
sens quantum ad gubernationem.879
871. See Ascent, Bk. 1, cc. 4-13 (Complete Works of Saint John of the Cross,
1.24-63) and Dark Night, Bk. 1, cc. 8-14 (1.371-97); see also above, pages 320–24.
872. Col. 479B, which reads “. . . quasi totus . . . ” (text reads “absorbun-
tur”): “fleshly motives are consumed and drawn out of the soul, so that the flesh
does not go contrary to the spirit in any way; and he becomes a completely
spiritual person.”
873. The third section of this sermon (nn. 7-9; PL 183, cols. 1104A–1105D)
presents the Word as the source of both wisdom (sapientia) and virtue (virtus),
the latter requiring effort and strength (vis), while the former consists in rest
and peace in the enjoyment of goodness, a taste (sapor) for goodness that has
replaced an inclination toward evil.
874. St. Bernard associates the Holy Spirit with the mourning “voice of the
turtledove” (Song of Songs, 2:12, referred to Romans 8:26) in section 6 of Sermo
59 in Cantica: “Ipse inducitur gemens, qui gementes facit” (“He who makes mourn-
ers is introduced as mourning Himself”) (PL 183, col. 1064B).
875. Col. 479D: “If it is so sweet to weep for you, how sweet will it be to
rejoice in you?”
876. Col. 479 D, which reads “legant in libro experientiae” (“they [you] read
in the book of experience”).
877. See In Cantica, 3.1 (PL 183, col. 794A): “Hodie legimus in libro experien-
tiae” (“Today we are reading in the book of experience”).
878. See above, n. 516.
879. Col. 480B: “[The Spouse] still remains present in so far as he remains
in charge of us.”
Chapter 8: occultatio gratiae:880 {this is the} traditional teaching

on aridity. Ne existimes te contemni, si paulisper tibi subtrahit sponsus
faciem suam. Omnia ista cooperantur tibi in bonum.881 Why aridity? venit
ad consolationem, recedit ad cautelam:882 as a humiliation; as a way of
teaching us to rely on grace, in order to arouse greater desire; to fix
our eyes on heaven. Ne exsilium deputemus pro patria.883 Summary:
“et ita quasi alis expansis supra nos volitans, provocat ad volandum.”884
Chapter 9: {there is a} danger of growing indifferent in arid-
ity, and turning to “other lovers”:885 {hence the} importance of
special care and delicacy of conscience in {a} time of aridity.
Chapter 10 returns to {the} main topic {with a} resumé of the
four activities.
Chapters 11-12: the vital interrelationship between reading,
meditation, etc. {is emphasized}:
1. {it is} useless simply to read without “chewing”—ad cordis
intima transmittere886—and putting into practice;
2. meditation without reading goes off the beam, gets away
from {the} tradition of the Fathers;
3. meditation without prayer {is} useless because we need
prayer to ask God’s grace and open our hearts to it;
4. prayer without meditation is tepid;
5. contemplation without prayer is rare or miraculous (see
above887).
880. Col. 480B: “the Concealment of Grace” (part of title of c. 8).

881. Col. 480B: “Do not think to despise yourself if the Spouse withdraws
his face from you for a little while. All these things work together for good for
you.”
882. Col. 480B: “he comes for consolation, he withdraws for a warning.”
883. Col. 480C, which reads “Ne ergo . . . ”: “Let us not consider our place
of exile our homeland.”
884. Col. 480D: “and so flying above us as if on outspread wings, he en-
courages us to fly.”
885. Col. 481A, which refers to a single other lover (“alium amatorem”).
886. Col. 481D, which reads “. . . transmittamus”: “to pass on to the inmost
part of the heart.”
887. This passage was quoted earlier: see note 839.
The “blessed life”888 (of the monk) is to be free of all other

concerns and occupied only in these four things (col. 483). All
the traditional language in praise of contemplation is used here:
vacare et videre quam suavis est Dominus.889 {There are} references
to the Transfiguration, to Jacob and Rachel.890 {There is a} warning
against turning again to worldly things. Though we cannot al-
ways be contemplating, we keep going up and down the “steps”
from one to another as circumstances permit. This is very practi-
cal and reasonable. Contemplation is enjoyed only at rare intervals
and briefly.
Chapter 13 discusses reasons for {a} failure to live in this
way. Some {are} inevitable and excusable: {a} duty to act, human
infirmity; one {is} culpable: “worldly vanity.”891 A prayer and la-
ment {follows} over the folly and infidelity of those who, having
tasted contemplation, return to worldly vanities. {This is} beauti-
ful and moving in its spirit of compunction and simplicity. Fi-
nally, {there is an} aspiration toward the perfect contemplation
of the blessed in heaven.
Appendix II. A Note on Brainwashing (“Thought Reform”)
(material from R. J. Lifton: Thought Reform and the Psychology of
Totalism [New York, 1961]892)
1. Note the word has been exploited in political mythology
and has become emotionally loaded. Promiscuous use of the term
to cover any form of indoctrination one does not approve of has
confused the issue. There is left a vague notion of brainwashing
as a quasi-magic power of gaining control over the mind. {There
has been a} sensationalist perversion of the concept in {the} U.S.
press.
888. See col. 483A, which reads “Beatus homo cujus animus, . . . ” (“Blessed
the man whose life, . . . ”).
889. Col. 483A: “to be empty and to see how sweet the Lord is.”
890. See col. 483B.
891. Col. 483D (“mundialis vanitas”).
892. Robert Jay Lifton, Thought Reform and the Psychology of Totalism: A
Study of “Brainwashing” in China (New York: W. W. Norton, 1961).
2. The reality: “thought reform” or “ideological reform”893

{as} practiced by the Chinese Communists {consists in} systemati-
cally and “scientifically” organized use of pressures and appeals,
intellectual, emotional and physical, “aimed at social control and
individual change.”894 {It is} centered on an artificially induced
crisis, analogous to a spiritual crisis, a synthetic “conversion,” in-
volving (a) confession—rejection of the past, perhaps induced
by {a} breakdown; (b) re-education—reorientation for the future,
with a total new self-commitment.895 This is where the study of
thought reform is important for us.
3. The most crucially important point about thought reform,
totally neglected by Western propagandists, is that it is sincerely
considered and intended by {the} Chinese as a therapy, which they
view as a “morally uplifting {. . .} and scientifically therapeutic
experience.”896 Physical torture plays a small part or no part in it
(propaganda to the contrary). Underlying it is a sincere but mis-
guided attempt to “save.”
Mao Tse Tung said re-education depends on two things: (1)
“punishing the past to warn the future”; (2) “saving men by cur-
ing their ills.” But punishing is not the most important. “The entire
purpose is to save the person, not to cure him to death” (Mao).897 This
is what constitutes the originality and difference of Chinese per-
secution from that of {the} Nazis or Imperial Rome. In a way it
is easier to resist mere savagery and cruelty. Here it is the “ministry
of love” (Orwell).898 Prisons are sometimes called “houses of
893. Lifton, 4.
894. Lifton, 5.
895. See Lifton, 5.
896. Lifton, 15.
897. Lifton, 13.
898. In George Orwell’s Nineteen Eighty-Four (New York: Harcourt Brace
& World, 1949), the Ministry of Love “maintains law and order” in Oceania
(6); Room 101 in the Ministry of Love is the torture chamber to which Winston
Smith, the main character of the novel, is brought (239 ff.); he is told, “There are
three steps in your reintegration, . . . There is learning, there is understand-
ing, and there is acceptance” (264), and by the conclusion of the book he has
meditation.”899 Thought reform = a spiritual retreat—a death and

rebirth (terms actually used900). Chinese Communist prison regula-
tions read as follows: “In dealing with the criminals, there shall
be regularly adopted measures of corrective study classes, indi-
vidual interviews, study of assigned documents, and organized
discussions, to educate them in the admission of guilt and obedi-
ence to the law, political and current events, labor production,
and culture, so as to expose the nature of the crime committed,
thoroughly wipe out criminal thoughts, and establish a new
moral code.”901 Sounds like a novitiate!!
The process of thought reform:
A. negative—“purgation”:
1. On arrest the prisoner may be put in a cell with other pris-
oners far advanced in thought reform, themselves “convinced”
and “apostolic.” They immediately work on him in the “struggle
session,”902 insisting on his wrong-headedness. Note {the} impor-
tance of putting {the} prisoner in with others so that he is never
alone, so that his intimate acts are subject to their scrutiny (he may
be in chains and others may have to help him to urinate, etc.), so
that his personal private life is reduced to zero.903
2. Interrogations, lasting ten or twelve hours {are followed
by} returning to further “struggle” in the cell. {The} aim {is} to
make one “confess”—not just specific imaginary crimes, but any-
thing that can be regarded as {a} crime—real acts, seen as
“crimes.” They either invent crimes or tell everything they can
think of with the implication that it had something wrong with
it. No sleep {is} allowed for many days. The prisoner gets to feel
become successfully “reintegrated”: “But it was all right, everything was all
right, the struggle was finished. He had won the victory over himself. He loved
Big Brother” (300).
899. Lifton, 14.
900. Lifton, 20, 66.
901. Lifton, 17.
902. See Lifton, 21.
he is completely in the power of his judge and says what the judge wants.
He becomes completely compliant, {and} denounces friends {and}
acquaintances, indiscriminately.
B. reconstruction:
1. Recognition of crimes: one now is made to see all this “in-
formation” from the “people’s standpoint,”904 to use Communist
language. Immediately better treatment is given, {and a} promise
of kindness and leniency is given. The abrupt change produces
hope. Note here the importance of changes of regime and of policy
which frequently take place in the prison. With changes in the
party line, more reasonable and humane officers come and go,
alternating with rigid and cruel types. The appearance of kinder
men helps soften up the prisoner and make him more coopera-
tive. Sincere admission in one case that a cruel prison policy had
been unjust ({an} admission by {a} new prison administration)
led to {the} submission of a priest-prisoner.905
In this atmosphere he works over his confession material
with great zeal in orthodox Communist language. {He} joins {a}
group study program {which lasts} ten or twelve hours a day,
{with} active participation required, {and} with profound self-exami-
nation as to {the} sources of one’s errors and open lucid criticism
of one’s own thinking. {One is} not allowed to be quiet, or to “relapse
into subjectivism or individualism.”906 Progress is evidenced by
“spontaneous” confidence in the people and in the value of one’s
re-education, and skill in criticizing others. (At this point the for-
eign prisoner signs his confession and reads it publicly, after sev-
eral years’ work on it, and is sent out of China.907)
Analysis of thought reform: “The penetration by the psycho-
logical forces of the environment into the inner emotions of the in-
dividual person is perhaps the outstanding psychiatric fact of
904. Lifton, 24.

905. See Lifton, 55 (though the cause-effect relationship is less clear-cut
than Merton suggests here).
thought reform” (p. 66).908 {There is a} death, by physical and emo-

tional assaults and pressures, {and a} rebirth, by leniency and de-
veloping confession. {An} assault upon identity909 {is made through}:
a) pressures to break down one’s idea of who he is, {and}

direct assertions that you are someone quite different than you
claim to be;
b) breaking down one’s sense of relatedness to others, par-
ticularly former associates;
c) {the} result {is a} reduction to {a} state of infancy or quasi-
animality, completely in the hands of the “trainer,”910 a regression
in which one is deprived of the power of adult existence. {There
is a} surrender of personal autonomy. Attempts to assert previous
identity are regarded as rebellion and produce more assaults.
{There is a} reduction to {a} hypnagogic state of susceptibility to
destructive influences.
Establishment of guilt:911
a) {the} prisoner must not only verbally admit guilt but really
experience it, for definite things he before considered right. {There
must be a} sense that punishment is deserved.
Self-betrayal:912 denunciations of friends {are required}, not just

to get {the} dope on them but to destroy your integrity and your
bond to them, subverting the structure of your own life {and} re-
nouncing the matrix of your former existence. In betraying friends
one betrays {the} vital core of his own existence. “The more of one’s
self he is led to betray, the greater is one’s involvement with his
captors; thus the captors reach down into the doubts, ambivalences
and antagonisms which we all carry beneath the surface of our
908. Text reads “This penetration . . . ”

909. See Lifton, 67–68.
910. Lifton, 67.
912. See Lifton, 68–69.
loyalties.”913 Once the captor has gained access to these weak-

nesses, the victim has to depend on the bond established between himself
and his captor. Note {the} demonic quality of this use of weakness
and passion to subvert and subject the whole person.
Breakdown914 {is} produced by total isolation in {the} midst
of completely hostile and aggressive fellow prisoners, who assert
you are wrong and deluded. {There is a} total break of {the} re-
latedness which is necessary for survival. Fear of total annihilation
is produced, {with} suicidal depression or psychotic delusions.
The bridge to safety:915 at the point of breakdown, leniency
supplies the sudden hope which is a bridge, crossing over to new
relatedness with the captors. Here the judge is changed or a new
character enters who acts in a human and gentle way, saying,
“The government does not want to kill you, just to cure you.”916
With this hope, he gets a desperate desire to save himself at all
costs. {This leads to} the compulsion to confess. Under pressure and
suffering the confession tends to be wild; {there is a willingness
to} confess anything. After the breakthrough the prisoner takes the
same view of himself as the government does. He now goes over his
actual words and deeds, reviewing them over and over in the
light of the new viewpoint, seeking to find everything that can
be considered “wrong” from the new viewpoint. He then makes
a “full confession” of all these real actions, but slanted and dis-
torted. {There is} a real inner compulsion to confess.917 This implies
commitment to the new beliefs and receptivity to them.
913. Lifton, 69, which reads: “The more of one’s self one is led . . . captors;
for by these means they make contact with whatever similar tendencies already
exist within the prisoner himself—with the doubts, antagonisms, and ambiva-
lences which each of us carries beneath the surface of his loyalties.”
914. See Lifton, 69–72.
915. See Lifton, 72–73.
916. Lifton, 73, which reads: “The government doesn’t want to kill you. It
wants to reform you.”
917. See Lifton, 74–75.
Channeling of guilt:918 now he learns to feel real guilt for rela-

tively indifferent or innocent acts which, in the light of the new
faith, are “crimes against the people.” How is this done? by tak-
ing the inevitable resistances and oppositions within every man,
for which all feel guilty, and centering everything on this guilty
“resistance.” This leads to a feeling of guilt for whatever one is,
in the face of the group standards. The mechanism is then {that
a} harsh group morality makes common cause with {a} harsh
superego, and vague free-floating guilt becomes guilt for specific
actions which the society considers criminal. N.B. {the} cleverness of
{this} technique: with a missionary who was a sincerely liberal
mind and who already regretted some of the defects of mission-
aries and of their approach, they pushed him to admit that the
missionaries had betrayed Christianity and had been essentially
unchristian.919 {Here is a} use of Marxian dialectic: Christianity
= thesis; personal deficiencies and doubts = antithesis.920
Progress and harmony:921 as “reform” develops, the prisoner
receives recognition and acceptance and becomes integrated in
the new milieu; {he} finds satisfaction and comfort in the new
way of thinking. It is now possible to talk freely, man to man,
with the captors, who are friendly. One feels human again. More
self-expression is permitted and one begins to feel that he really
means what he is saying.
Final confession:922 it is now time for the “conclusive state-
ment,” the final and “correct” version of the confession, which
now the prisoner himself fully accepts and believes. This is the purpose
of the long process. They demand that their accusations become
the prisoner’s self-accusations. After this the recovery of one’s
normal self is permitted. One is the same person again but reborn
as a Communist—for instance, a priest working with the Com-
munists, convinced they are right.923
918. See Lifton, 75–76.

919. See Lifton, 55–56, 105.
920. See Lifton, 77–78.
921. See Lifton, 79–80.
922. See Lifton, 80–82.
923. See Lifton, 83, and chapter 11 (207–21).
Thought reform: {one must also take into account} “apparent

resisters”924 {and} their thoughts:
a) analysis and understanding of what is going on:925 this

gives {a} capacity to predict {and} dispels fear of {the} unknown;
{it gives the ability} to enter in while maintaining contact with
{one’s} own spiritual tradition.
b) avoidance of emotional participation:926 remaining outside
{the} system of communication, maintaining {a} private world
and {one’s} own symbols; a neutralizing attitude towards assaults
(humor, stoicism)—humor creates a bond of sympathy antithetical to
the reform.
c) non-violence,927 if based on {a} deep supernatural tradi-
tion, {is} affirming a moral position higher than {the} claims of
thought reform.
d) identity reinforcement:928 {this is an} essential protection
against disintegration: clinging to one’s own tradition, {e.g.} see-
ing things in terms of Catholic theology, {provides} reminders of
who you are.
Pseudo-strength represents a psychological danger:929

a) denial and repression of one’s own weakness;
b) denial of one’s attraction to the thought-reform propa-
ganda (protestations that one has not given in).
(Note a case where this emotional weakness leads to a war now
attitude930 and {a} constant struggle against {the} breakthrough
of despair.)
924. See Lifton, chapter 8 (133–51).

925. See Lifton, 145–46.
926. See Lifton, 146–47.
927. See Lifton, 147, which does not use the term “non-violence” but does
refer to “passive resistance in the Gandhian tradition.”
929. See Lifton, 148–49.
930. See Lifton, 142, 148–49.
APPENDIX A
TEXTUAL NOTES
Readings Adopted from Mimeograph

1 AN INTRODUCTION] preceded by (Title Page). preceded on
separate page by “The essence of mysticism being not a doc-
trine but a way of life its interests require the existence
of groups of persons who put its principles into effect.”
Evelyn Underhill
3 FOREWORD] preceded by p 2
15 Ascetical and Mystical Theology] preceded by
Myst Theol.
1-2. Introd
3-4. St John’s Gospel
5. Martyrs
6. Gnostics. Divinisation
7. Xtological controversies. / Mysticism.
(8. Greg. Nyss. Spiritual Senses)
9. Greg. Nyssa. Cappadocians.
10. Evagrius followed by added (13)
16 Pseudo-Dionysius + Dionysian Trad. in West preceded
by cancelled 11 preceded by interlined (14-15. Theoria
Phys and followed by cancelled 14. Dionysius + his trad
marked with arrow for placement before 16
17 Western Mysticism preceded by cancelled 12
Franciscan Tradition etc. preceded by cancelled 13 and followed
on separate line by cancelled 14 Dionysian tradition in
West and outline of separation of Myst + Theol.
18 written over 15 followed by—The Rhenish Mystics
19—Quietism preceded by cancelled 18
20—Jesuits St. Theresa preceded by cancelled 19 and followed
by added + later Carmelites
21—St John Cross Dark Night preceded by cancelled 18-19
preceded by 20-21 added in left margin and cancelled
349
20—Later Carmelites] 20 circled and marked with arrow to

precede 21
22—Byz. Myst. Conclusion preceded on separate line by
cancelled 21–22. Byzantine Mysticism
18—The Rhenish . . . Byzantine Mysticism cancelled and
replaced in right margin by
1—Denys.
2—Dionysians in West
3—Western Myst.
4—The 14th–15th Cents.
5—Quietists.
6—Jesuits + St Theresa.
7—St John of +.
5–14 Table of Contents . . . thought reform] omitted in copy text
35 However] preceded by (Remarks—continued)
43 I would . . . p. 108–9).] TEXT READ (copy) St Ignatius, to the
Romans, n. 2, (Fathers of the Church, Apostolic Fathers,
p. 108) followed by (insert text from Romans interlined
following cancelled Text here.
44–45 I am writing . . . p. 97).] COPY here, Romans n. 4 p. 109, the
famous passage Let me be thrown to the wild beasts,
through them I can reach God. . . I am the wheat of Christ
. . . ” and n. 5. COPY also, Magnesians, n. 5, p. 97.
46 “Carnal . . . p. 90)] copy Ephesians 8 (last 4 lines, p. 90
91 another approach] followed by (Here insert notes on Dom
Anselm Stolz.) p 27a
96 Religious knowledge . . . II:162 ).] Here quote classical passage
from De Vita Moysis copy (see notes Cassian + the Fathers
top of p 31
112–13 It is clear, . . . n. 5).] (copy the last 7 lines of n. 5)
113 But there . . . n. 9).] (copy this last part as marked in our book).
151 Itinerarium . . . Opuscula).] from last # of Itinerarium Mentis in
Deum (VII.6) (late Medieval Mysticism p 141) (copy) 1st
12 lines—down to “darkness”)
162 If to any . . . p. 90).] (Copy text quoted in Medieval mystics of
England p 90.)
166–67 We were discoursing . . . p. 32).] read the quote given by
Butler on p. 32 (copy)
179 If this transition, . . . p. 140);] read [copy]
186–88 Here it is . . . p. 346–7).] (copy—Spiritual Cant. Vol II p.
195 B. The German] preceded by inserted penciled contents page:
Myst Theol.
Appendix A 351
March written vertically in left margin to include nn. 1–6

1—Introduction
2—Introduction
3—St John’s Gospel
4—Martyrs + Gnostics—Irenaeus, Clement etc.
Gnostics] preceded by vertical line with 5 interlined above
and cancelled
6—Divinisation. Xtological Controversies. 7 “Mysticism”
6] interlined above and preceded by cancelled 5
7] interlined above and preceded by vertical line
6—St Gregory of Nyssa. Pseudo-Macarius 8 (Sp. Senses—
Wm of St Thierry)
8] interlined above and preceded by vertical line
April written vertically in left margin to include nn. 9–14
9—Evagrius Ponticus
9] preceded by cancelled 7
10—Pseudo-Denis
11—“Western Mysticism” written over erased words
10—Dionysian Tradition in the West
10] followed by cancelled 12
West] followed by 12 [written over 13] Franciscans—
Rhenish Mystics added in right margin and
marked for insertion and followed by 14 Complete
Separation of Myst + Theol added in right
margin and cancelled
11—Quietism written over erased words
12—Post Trent – Jesuits – St Theresa.
13—St John of the Cross
14—Dark Night.
May written vertically in left margin to include nn. 15-22
15—Later Carmelites—mod. Debates
16—followed by cancelled Semi Quietists etc
17—followed by cancelled Modern Writers—Saudreau
Poulain
18—Non-Xtian mysticism?
19—Hallaj—Sufis
20—
21—Byzantine Mysticism
22—St Gregory Palamas
197–98 Suso on . . . pp. 259–60).] (copy) Read here Suso on Gelassenheit
in Late Med. Myst. p. 259.
216 In the sixteenth century] preceded by read:

249 Despite all . . . pp. 259-260).] Read (copy) p. 259 from “Despite
all I have said . . . . . to top p. 260, “what it desires.”
279–80 And supposing . . . p. 193).] read Living Flame III, 59 Peers
III p. 193 (copy marked passage)
296–97 Oh, my God, . . . translation).] (copy pp. 269 begin line 10 “O
my God how great are these trials . . . ”–270 ending with
the words “at a time when everything really seems to be
lost”) (line 11)
305–306 And so . . . child.] “And so it is sad to see many souls . . .
Read (copy from line 10 to end of n. 3)
306–307 For some . . . befalling it.] then Read (copy) p. 13 “For some
confessions . . . down to end of n. 4)
314–16 These spiritual . . . (ibid., 58).] copy (Read)—#s 53, pp. 189–190
also #58, p 192.
318–19 Oh, souls, . . . p. 198).] Copy here #65. p. 197. #67. p 198.
319 In this way . . . p. 188).] Read (copy) n. 50, p. 188.
326–27 This was . . . (p. 405).] Copy n. 2 Page 405.
327–28 But the question . . . (p. 406).] Copy n. 2, p. 406.
328 Beneath (p. 408).] Copy n. 7, p. 408.
332 In this . . . (p. 434).] Copy n. 4, page 434.
347 of despair.)] followed by
Zahn
Friedensbund Deutscher Katholiken—founded by F.
Stratmann after WW I. Had as many as 40,000 members
before Hitler. Much official encouragement. 13 Bishops
were supposed to be active members. Incl. Faulhaber
+ Bertram (Cardinals). Was wiped out by Nazis as a
traitorous organization—officially dissolved July 1, 1933.
leaders exiled or imprisoned. At most a few members
were active as pacifists during the war. 7 men on record
as refusing service 6 executed 3 Austrians 1 indefinitely
imprisoned in mental inst. In any case no support from
spiritual leaders. nb. “objector” might be a Gestapo agent
seeking to trap priest.
Destruction of Friedensbund—
1) Resistance or even lack of enthusiasm could mean
death
2) Death for unknown or trumped up disgraceful cause
(“homosexuality”)
3) Total hopelessness of protest, inability to make protest
known.
Appendix A 353
4) Fear for dependents.

5) anger at air raids
“The German Catholic who looked to his religious
Superiors for spiritual guidance + direction regarding
service in Hitler’s wars received virtually the same
answers he would have received from the Nazi ruler
himself” p. 17. Prisoners even were denied sacraments
by chaplains, for their attitude—at least until just before
execution. Bec. Their resistance was considered violation
of Xtian duty.
Hitlers wars—supported by Catholics—40 percent of the
population—Soldiers swear unconditional personal oath to
Hitler.
1) Aggression, with Russia, on Catholic nation—
Poland—after faked “incident” to claim Polish
“aggression” (on a Radio Station).
2) Why?—opposition wd have brought on extreme
anti-Catholic persecution
—opposition might (after war with Russia) have
helped Communism
—some elements of justice in the German cause.
—earlier support of Hitler before War—as
“pacifier” of Germany, bringing order +
preventing revolution + Hitler first promised
support of religion
See quote from pamphlet by a theologian—p. 57.
The 7 objectors—Executed—3 Austrians Fr. Franz
Reinisch—Franz Jägerstätter—Cath Action leader—J.
Mayr-Nesser 3 Germans in Xt Kg Soc. Fr Metzger—Br
Maurus—Br Michael 1 German layman interned—Josef
Fleischer.
Von Galen—Heroism of his protests agst Nazi injustice.
Staunch defense of war—as for Germany’s rights. agst
Western Freemasons + godless Bolshevism (but
inconsistency) Von G. a “perfect” bishop acc to all
standards since M.A. His very perfection + virtues made
him unable to see real issue. made him work for forces
of destruction Faulhaber—defended OT + implicitly
Judaism (Had received iron cross in WW I—chaplain genl.
of Armies of Bavaria) Had been official protector of
Friedensbund. but did not come to its defense. Yet in
1932 had called for a “new ethic of war + preparation for
peace.” 1932 “Moral theology will speak a new language.

It will remain true to the old principles but in the question
of the permissibility of war new facts will be taken into
account:
1) communications – shd make war more avoidable
2) war technology now too destructive. “no longer
human not to mention Christian”
3) After war—both would be “losers”—no
proportionality between objectives + price to be paid.
1930 “I work for peace today because I am convinced that
it is no longer human to wage war with clouds of gas that
smother all personal bravery, with airborne poison bombs
that destroy all life from nursing infant to aged invalid in
a few brief hours . . . ”
Gröber against war—addressing national conclave of
peace movement 1931 p. 124. but against pacifism in
1934. sacrificial death of the soldier. p. 126
German bishops. 1) convinced that WW I had been just— +
that it had been unjustly settled hence WW II was just. 2)
Disagreed with Hitler on many things + protested
outspokenly
a) But H. was legitimate authority + must be obeyed
b) And he was against Bolshevism. Hence could be
acclaimed as “providential.” But they supported Hitler
also when he was allied with Stalin in war agst Poland +
Hitler’s attack on Poland, then on Russia—questionable
morality!
Additions and Alterations

3 and probably . . . errors] interlined with arrow for placement
It has not . . . unfinished.] interlined with arrow for placement
These lectures] interlined above cancelled They
broaden] interlined above cancelled widen
and positive] interlined with a caret
non-Catholic] interlined with a caret
by us] interlined above cancelled here
4 lived] followed on separate line by cancelled Abbey of Gethsemani
15 1. Aim of the Course] interlined
obviously] interlined above cancelled of course
assimilated] followed by x’d out along the
monk] added on line
Appendix A 355
to cover] followed by x’d out the whole field, as if one were

The main] preceded by x’d out To situate
16 there is] added on line
combined] preceded by x’d out anti-mysticism
affected] followed by x’d out the Church
after . . . St. John’s Gospel] added on line
17 we will see] preceded by x’d out with a brief
18 easily] preceded by x’d out found in books
However it . . . mysticism.] opposite page
school] followed by cancelled marked the
19 It is treated . . . sufficient] added on line after cancelled Augustine
can be discussed elsewhere. Passing reference is here suf-
ficient. So also for Gregory the Great.
It is] interlined above cancelled They are
reading lists] added in lower margin
(Homer uses . . . art.”)] interlined
applied to . . . training.] added on line
19–20 The whole of . . . 109 end.] opposite page
20 d) oversimplification . . . maintained] added below and marked
with arrow for placement
22 arisen] followed by cancelled a distinction between
Mysticism and . . . whole.] added on line
infused] preceded by x’d out the
be separated,] preceded by x’d out properly
23 difficult] interlined above cancelled dangerous
24 and must] interlined below and marked with arrow for insertion
cf. . . . Stace.] interlined above and marked with arrow for insertion
25 Görres’ . . . diabolical mysticism.] added on line
Before] preceded by x’d out We must dis
affected] preceded by x’d out more or less taking into
26 hereafter RAM] added on line
hereafter VS] added on line
26–27 Also . . . Avon-Fontainebleau.] opposite page
27 There is no . . . high.] added on line followed by x’d out The early
writers of the 20th Century
attitudes to mystical theology] added on line after cancelled
approaches:
in 1896] interlined with a caret
28–29 tends to . . . position] added on line
29 reappraisal] preceded by x’d out theological synthesis, free from
be defended.] followed by x’d out The book may
an attempt at] added in left margin before cancelled a
30 takes up] followed by x’d out the

31 Butler’s thesis] interlined to replace This with arrow for placement
tends to] followed by x’d out emphasize
exalts] preceded by x’d out ignores the main tradition.
32 (in Revue . . . RAM)] added on line
RAM)] preceded by cancelled hereafter
clarification] preceded by x’d out identification of the Pseudo
Macarius
33 new edition of St. Bernard] added on line
Studies for . . . Bernard] interlined
34 very rich] preceded by x’d out field which
35 people to church] followed by cancelled in America
in the monastery] added on line before cancelled where we are
36 modern world] interlined above cancelled monastery
37 especially . . . bread] interlined
but not . . . in us] interlined
faith who] who interlined above cancelled which
38 center] followed by cancelled to life
39 Some Remarks: . . . beyond liturgy.] opposite page
consent . . . struggle] added in left margin with arrow for placement
external . . . Reality] added in left margin with arrow for placement
leading] preceded by cancelled N.B.
in the Father] in interlined with a caret
40 mystical doctrine] mystical interlined with a caret
this has been done] this interlined above cancelled it
41 Spirit of Love.] followed by x’d out Romans
42 Note—a very . . . this light.] opposite page
A. Martyrdom] interlined
43 to the Father.”] followed by x’d out Other deaths may
45–46 la. The Mystical . . . living in us.] opposite page
45 He who fails . . . incomplete.] added in left margin
46 martyrdom brings . . . God] interlined below cancelled it
certainly does this.
Martyrdom is . . . baptism] Martyrdom interlined above
cancelled it
47 in this text] interlined with a caret
of the three . . . union.] added on line
N.B. Secret . . . beginning.”] added on line
relationship] followed by x’d out with the
47–48 St. Ephrem . . . (violent) experience.] opposite page
48 of the “essence”] preceded by cancelled fully
Appendix A 357
49 superficial.] followed by x’d out The

50 as opposed to liberation from the flesh.] added on line
Above all . . . Spirit.] opposite page
51 Christ as] added in left margin and marked for insertion
52 of its mysteries,] followed by x’d out helps
as contributing to Christian gnosis.] added on line
cast.] followed by x’d out In this
53 He defines . . . means.”] opposite page
should be] interlined below cancelled is
equals mystical] mystical interlined below and marked for insertion
However, it is still debatable.] added on line
54 mystery of the divine] preceded by x’d out union
The Scriptures are . . . of Scripture.] opposite page
56 man becomes] interlined above x’d out to become
also] added in left margin and marked for insertion to replace
cancelled later
(including by Clement himself)] added on line
where he is] he interlined below cancelled it
57 with present-day theologians] interlined with a caret
part of] interlined below and marked for insertion
Note: Dom . . . p. 283] added in lower margin
nourished by] interlined above cancelled flowering in preceded by
cancelled based
58 We will . . . Senses] added in upper margin
A. Theosis—Deificatio—Divinization.] interlined
It is a term . . . implications.] interlined
Epimenides and Aratus] added on line
Read . . . wisdom.] interlined
For Plato,] preceded by cancelled The actual term divini
For Paul, . . . of God.] interlined
59 For Clement, . . . speculation.] opposite page
Prot.] followed by cancelled I.85
Origen also . . . DS, III:1379] opposite page
shalt have] preceded by x’d out hast become God
60 Note: already . . . divinization.] opposite page
61 made Himself] preceded by x’d out was made man in order
by nature belongs] preceded by x’d out is by nature God
last end.] followed by x’d out It is not
in other words] followed by x’d out all
His body] preceded by x’d out this life
(De Incarn. 54; see below)] added on line
62 nature] interlined above x’d out life,
63 the full] preceded by x’d out divinization

A note: . . . Resurrection.] opposite page
n.b. Leclercq, p. 271] added in left margin
64 Observe . . . p. 228] opposite page
65 Pastoral . . . “self.”] added in left margin
66 against the Macedonians, . . . deifies us.] opposite page followed
by cancelled St Gregory Nazianzen agst
Cappadocian Fathers] added on line
St. Maximus] added on line
66–67 Note: Pseudo-Denis . . . God in Christ.] added in lower margin
67 B.] interlined above cancelled 2.
Theoria Mystike, Theognosis:] Mystike interlined with a caret
hidden on] on altered from in
68 It cannot . . . of Christ.] opposite page
69 and theoria mystike] interlined with a caret
Joannem of Origen.] Joannem altered from Jo. and of Origen added
on line
disposes] preceded by x’d out makes
70 intervene,] followed by cancelled but
angels] followed by x’d out having
He unites . . . visionis.] interlined
70–71 Note . . . ancient sense.] opposite page
71 closing his] followed by x’d out exterior
72 stress] preceded by x’d out sufficiently
dogmatic] followed by cancelled theologian
mystical] altered from mystic
theologian, . . . a mystic.] added on line
73–74 In St. Gregory . . . both to us.] opposite page
73 basic truths] preceded by cancelled the
74 three] interlined above cancelled two
secondly through Cassian] added in left margin and marked for
insertion
77 But the living . . . Phil. 4:7.] opposite page
statements] preceded by cancelled made
traditional . . . of wisdom.”] added on line
78 pastoral . . . true contemplation.] interlined
St. Chrysostom . . . SC p. 166)] opposite page
inexpressible] preceded by cancelled invisible and followed by
God interlined with a caret
mortal] added in right margin and marked for insertion
seraphim] followed by cancelled comprehend him contemplate
Him (fully)
Appendix A 359
(obscurity)] interlined with a caret

(gnosis)] interlined with a caret
79 “Holy of Holies,”] interlined with a caret
union] followed by cancelled the quest
gnosis but] preceded by cancelled for
but ousia.] preceded by cancelled for
to ousia by love.] added on line
example of . . . be revealed.] opposite page
This divine . . . says Gregory.] added on line
ecstasy] interlined with a caret
The following . . . important:] added on line
which remains . . . knowledge of God.] added on line
80 N.B. this . . . exhortation.] added on line
81 or apophatic] or interlined above cancelled fr
role of] interlined with a caret
state] interlined above cancelled illegible word
82 fulfilled] ful interlined with a caret
a progress] preceded by cancelled an infini
C.] added on line before cancelled 3
rather] preceded by x’d out more
by the bodily senses.] added on line
an experience] an interlined above cancelled a sense
by the exterior senses.] interlined
He is really . . . what it is.] added on line
(We bypass . . . Cassian.)] opposite page
83 not visions, etc.] followed by cancelled That other category
presents other problems, but it does not involve spiritual
senses because the vision is presented to the bodily or
at least to the interior senses. Or at least it is translated
completely into bodily terms in order to be expressed.
(vg when St Bernadette “saw the Lady” it may or may not
have involved the “spiritual senses” but the experience
reduced itself for her to a bodily vision, literally seeing
Mary present. The problem of the spiritual senses is
the problem of explaining an experience of what is by its
very nature inaccessible to sense. A glorified body does not
come in this category. Or does it?)
St. Bonaventure . . . Dei”] opposite page
mystical action of] interlined with a caret
literary] interlined with a caret
84 and in disguise. . . . images.] added on line
Origen] followed by illegible cancelled word
84–85 The doctrine . . . developed.] opposite page

85 involve] interlined below cancelled mean
sensible] preceded by cancelled a
on a miraculous] on a interlined above cancelled of a
plane] preceded by cancelled nature
objective] interlined with a caret
the Sacred] preceded by cancelled Christ in His
87 Poulain does . . . Two Nights.] interlined after cancelled
They would exclude a form of mystical prayer in which
precisely there is no feeling of presence of God “as object.”
It would completely exclude the mystical prayer of the
Dark Night. (Perhaps P. would try to fit this in under
ligature).
88 (God and angels)] interlined with a caret
c)] added in left margin
The sense of touch . . . level of mystical prayer.] opposite page
followed by cancelled The sense of spiritual touch
The sense of spiritual] preceded by cancelled the principal and
most mystical of these senses is that of touch.
(The expression . . . mystical.)] parentheses added
88–89 Spiritual touch “can . . . take place.] interlined followed by
cancelled Poulains doctrine of the spiritual senses is
inadequate and arbitrary.
89 Poulain does well . . . mystic” (!!)] opposite page
while admitting] preceded by cancelled Attempts an explanation
that is more satisfactory
little] added on line preceded by cancelled nothing at all
It easily . . . verbalism.] added in lower margin followed by
cancelled It gives no practical help to us.
between the spiritual senses] followed by x’d out of
(though we . . . unsatisfactory).] added on line
Those senses] senses interlined with a caret
90 This theory] preceded by cancelled St Gregory of Nyssa, and the
Spiritual Senses.
and sight] followed by x’d out alone
How valid . . . distinction?] added on line and followed by
cancelled It seems certain that the “senses that perfect the
intellect” attain to God mediately and those that are
connected with Love attain to Him immediately. But that
does not mean that either the one or the other operate
only on certain levels of prayer, in certain degrees.
And it is . . . psychology.] interlined
Appendix A 361
doctrine] followed by cancelled of Olphe Gaillard

91 opposes and] interlined with a caret
original] preceded by cancelled sin
pointing to] interlined with a caret
share] preceded by cancelled part
“spiritual senses”] preceded by cancelled senses
92 Here we find . . . doctrine.] added on line
One might . . . play.] added on line
94 But we must . . . own sake.] added in lower margin
The biblical . . . Exodus 33.] opposite page
tends to] followed by x’d out throw much emphasis on the
96 A. The Problem of Evagrius.] interlined
Origenist and] followed by x’d out one
97 Being a . . . the desert.] interlined
97–98 Though Evagrius . . . points.] opposite page
97 contemplation of the Trinity,] preceded by cancelled Trinitarian
98 L. Bouyer . . . moment.] interlined above and marked for insertion
became a monk] preceded by x’d out was accep
most widely read] interlined above cancelled chief
99 The most . . . in 1958.] opposite page
This has . . . 1960.] added on line
100 fell . . . (captivity)] interlined above cancelled limited with the
fall.
Man’s primitive . . . sakes.] opposite page
and keep . . . passion.] added on line
Man must . . . cosmos in Christ.] opposite page
101 5] interlined above cancelled 4
for . . . primitive state.] interlined above and marked with arrow
for insertion
6] added on line before cancelled 5
in Evagrius, . . . love.] added on line
higher degree . . . life).] followed by cancelled 4 and for the
purification of all [ ] of the [ ] itself
102 notion?] followed by x’d out What are we to
idea of apatheia] followed by x’d out as he atti
(St. Jerome . . . apatheia).] added on line
The letter] preceded by x’d out According to Jerome
Jerome says] interlined
103 exactly with] followed by x’d out Cassian’s
104 Certainly . . . from temptation.] added in lower margin

105 i) Apatheia . . . I.86).] opposite page
retain] followed by x’d out for it
106 habitual intimacy] added on line
or thoughts.] added on line
107 without intermediary] interlined with a caret
This state] added in left margin before cancelled It
power, here,] preceded by cancelled and
he says,] added on line
108 stressed . . . see above] added on line
stressed] interlined below cancelled mentioned
109 In n. 82, . . . flesh.] opposite page
110 that come from] interlined above cancelled of
a) In the . . . as demons.] opposite page
b] added on line before cancelled a
111 Note: . . . contemplation.] opposite page
c] added on line before cancelled b
devil,] followed by x’d out as
d] added on line before cancelled c
112 They also . . . impossible.] opposite page
e)] added on line
to the soul] the soul added on line after cancelled it
114 alien] followed by x’d out thoughts while they are [n.b. thoughts
cancelled erroneously]
Note that . . . III.4).] opposite page
(see Keph. Gnost. I.27)] added on line
115 revelation] preceded by x’d out cosmic revela
and begin . . . beyond] added on line before cancelled but still in
the realm of
to the logoi] interlined above cancelled logos, and
objective, and formal] added on line
Evagrius stresses . . . III.58] opposite page
only on the threshold] added on line
116 He says elsewhere . . . of God.”] opposite page
118 In Ps. 140, quoted . . . p. 96] added in lower margin and marked
for insertion
Note: this . . . objective.] opposite page
subject] preceded by cancelled as [ ]
119 This is . . . misleading.] added on line
120 harsh] interlined above x’d out great
real] interlined below cancelled great
question] interlined below cancelled matter
Appendix A 363
He does . . . evil.] added on line

He says . . . III.59).] opposite page
He tends] preceded by cancelled As a result of this
121 f) . . . than this.] opposite page
g] written over f
We can . . . say] interlined above cancelled It can in fact be said
and marked for insertion
without forms,] followed by cancelled and
distinction] preceded by illegible cancelled word
122 Evagrius . . . III.67)] interlined
especially . . . Redeemer:] added on line
It is a spiritual . . . pure intelligibles.] opposite page
123 Theoria gives] Theoria added in left margin before cancelled It
123–24 St. Maximus, on whom . . . von Balthasar.] opposite page
124 He unites] preceded by cancelled He corrects Evagrius while
using him. He corrects Pseudo Denys.
mysteriously] preceded by x’d out interiorly
1288)] followed by x’d out In St Maximus Quest 51 ad Thalassios
125 But note, . . . creating him.] opposite page
this “natural” contemplation] quotation marks added
126 political] preceded by x’d out events, in art
for Maximus] preceded by x’d out not merely
127 In the full . . . alone.] added in lower margin
both] interlined with a caret
Von Balthasar says:] preceded by x’d out Hence St Maximus
says: “For love of us Christ hides himself mysteriously in
the inner logoi of created things . . . totally and with all
his plenitude . . . in all that is varied lies hidden
128 A] added in left margin
the complement . . . apatheia.] added on line
128–29 This implies . . . meaning.] opposite page
The right use] preceded by x’d out Created things are seen
130 Certain created] followed by x’d out realities
pragmatic,] followed by x’d out indifferent
change,] followed by x’d out destruction and
131 immediate] preceded by x’d out ends
wine] followed by x’d out what
132 real self, then] followed by x’d out he
133 obscuring] followed by x’d out of the
Examples of] followed by x’d out artistic
135 58 to Thalassios] to interlined above cancelled ad
136 Hence St. Maximus . . . prayer.] added in lower margin
simple] interlined below cancelled vocal

VII] added on line
definitive] preceded by cancelled break
among . . . followers.] added on line
its own right.] preceded by x’d out the
was rejected] was interlined with a caret
was accepted] was interlined with a caret
to become . . . tradition.] added on line
137 developed] interlined above cancelled was
modern] added in lower margin with arrow for placement
138 tall tales.] followed by x’d out (cf the II Nocturn of the
later than] interlined above cancelled after
139 is in any case] added in left margin before cancelled and
140 Doctor and] followed by x’d out Dante
between the celestial hierarchy] hierarchy added in right margin
consecrate] preceded by cancelled receive
141 Eros is . . . creature.] added on line
divine] interlined with a caret
143 This is the . . . self also.] added in lower margin
the full] preceded by cancelled a full
De] interlined
intellect,] followed by x’d out to enter
Divine . . . Hierarchies] added in right margin
144 (Note: . . . [Bacchus].)] added on line
145 We are going . . . Augustinian.] opposite page
These are . . . presumably.] added above with arrow for placement
primarily] interlined above cancelled purely and simply
whom we] interlined above cancelled who [altered to whom] a
“purely Western mystics”] quotation marks added
One of the . . . Sarrazin.] opposite page
they popularize Denys.] added on line
146 The school represented . . . logicians.] opposite page
Hugh . . . p. 92] opposite page
Hugh of St. Victor improved] preceded by x’d out c)
147 above all] interlined above cancelled also
tradition of speculation] preceded by x’d out line of
They are . . . secondarily.] added on line
147–48 Richard . . . spirituality.] opposite page
147 73] interlined above cancelled 75?
148 Of Richard] preceded by x’d out It is a
rather than . . . Bernard] interlined with a caret
means mysticism.] followed by cancelled Bonaventure appeals
Appendix A 365
three could] followed by x’d out and were

Though Bonaventure . . . a Dionysian.] interlined
Dom] added in left margin
vol. III] added on line
is there.] followed by cancelled Also of course D’s angelology
influences Bernard. followed by Read from Sententiae added
on line and cancelled
149 Even Gertrude . . . Pseudo-Denys!!] interlined
150 St. Bonaventure, . . . in the De Triplici Via.] opposite page
Here he . . . tradition.] added on line
151 other works] followed by cancelled and a more or less explicit
rejection of cataphatic theology, which is not according to
the mind of Denys.
regarded as secondary] interlined above cancelled rejected as
external and trivial.
wisdom and science.] followed by cancelled In this new approach
to mysticism, it is stated that one must formally reject the
activity of the intellect and replace it by the activity of
love.
151–52 Here read . . . speculative theology.] opposite page
152 and prayer] interlined below and marked for insertion
trend was stimulated] interlined above cancelled deviation was
made possible
study and] followed by x’d out effort
153 (like St. Bonaventure)] added in right margin
devotional] followed by x’d out and
including] preceded by x’d out mostly
154 The influence . . . century.] added in lower margin
traveled] interlined above cancelled goes
and blossomed out in] interlined with a caret above cancelled with
155 inseparable] preceded by x’d out based on the dr
misleading] added in left margin and marked for insertion to
replace cancelled not true
separate and clearly] interlined with a caret
155–56 Speaking of . . . generally Dionysian.] opposite page
155 stress on . . . will] interlined above and marked with arrow for
insertion
156 Since in . . . outline.] added in lower margin
excessive confidence in] followed by x’d out grace and
157 contemplated in] preceded by x’d out found i
A] written over I
158 (lives . . . four years)] added on line
sacramental] followed by x’d out mysticism

To this extent . . . his love.] interlined
and the ascent . . . ecstasy] interlined with a caret
159 The crisis . . . lost likeness.] opposite page
revelation.] followed by x’d out Hence the ascent to God
It is by . . . created things.] opposite page
160 9] written over 8
Love is] preceded by cancelled 10
10] written over 11
11] written over 12
161 e)] added on line
In what] preceded by x’d out Whether or
162–63 Note . . . nature] opposite page
163 more ontological] more interlined with a caret
(how intellectual?)] added on line
though grace] followed by x’d out can
This is . . . gone.] added on line
God in the] followed by cancelled Church.
166 This “Churchly” . . . experiences.] opposite page
168 B] added on line before cancelled II.
170 C] added on line before cancelled III
The Franciscan Movement] interlined
permit] followed by cancelled further
170–71 Our approach . . . of reform.] opposite page
171 to become] interlined above cancelled becoming
172 The Cistercian heritage . . . mystics.] interlined
one of the most] preceded by x’d out a most
Dante places . . . Victor, etc.] opposite page
173 contributed] preceded by x’d out led to the
breakaway . . . Church.] added on line after cancelled
Reformation
His “mission”] added in left margin and marked for insertion to
replace cancelled This
and his work] preceded by x’d out until his disc
and hotheads . . . rebellion.] added on line
174 The most important] preceded by x’d out The important
expressed the new] preceded by x’d out sought to
Note the . . . sphere).] opposite page
great development] preceded by cancelled tendency of the
transcending suffering.] added on line
175 study and mysticism] interlined below and marked with arrow for
insertion
Appendix A 367
more human] more interlined below cancelled purely

resorted] preceded by x’d out selected one half of it
a compromise] preceded by x’d out perhaps
176 More numerous] preceded by x’d out Greater
Providence] followed by cancelled and
joy and perfection] followed by x’d out seen
They are first] They added in left margin
He reached] He added on line after cancelled who
prudence] preceded by x’d out spirit
177 Let us briefly . . . DS).] added in lower margin
says Bonaventure] followed by cancelled divides theology into
(1) speculative] preceded by cancelled Word teaches 3 kinds of
Theol. in left margin
(propria)] interlined
lost by] by written over in
initiative of {the} soul] followed by cancelled in grace
178 gift of understanding] interlined below and marked with arrow
for insertion
gift of wisdom] interlined below and marked with arrow for
insertion
1. Intellectual Contemplation] preceded by cancelled Intellectual
Cont – Itinerarium ascends by 6 degrees 2 in each of them
a) Through universe. b) Through the Soul itself c) above
the soul cf. Augustine in Ps 40 extra se intra se supra se
(culminates in ecstasy of admiration
180 Note the role . . . between them.] interlined
180–81 In the sleep of the powers] interlined
181 on sense] followed by cancelled but this would be short of
traditional standards which demand cessation of even
purely spiritual thought
in via.”] followed by cancelled The DS article is unsatisfactory.
More so—the section devoted to St. B in Spiritualité du
Moyen age.
IX] added on line
Brethren . . . secret society] added on line
Humiliati, . . . away] interlined
N.B.] added in left margin
181–82 among . . . captives etc.] added on line
182 B. The “Frauenbewegung”] interlined
the importance . . . d’Anvers).] opposite page
in their simplicity] added in left margin to replace cancelled [ ] in
their simpleness
seek God] followed by cancelled with

183 ecstatic piety] interlined
very rich in spirituality] interlined
left to] preceded by cancelled mostly women, without sound
formation
or at least . . . condemnation.] added on line
and Beghards (men)] interlined below and marked with arrow for
insertion
Note, . . . avoided.] added on line
183–84 At the same . . . mystical lives.] opposite page
183 care] preceded by cancelled bother
184 Summary:] preceded by x’d out Note: popular attitude to these
groups reflected in words that have come down in the
language, derived from Beghard, for instance bigot and
bugger.
and attained sanctity.] added on line
lay] interlined above x’d out mysticism
great . . . and Germany!] interlined
185 Beatrice had . . . a Béguine).] added on line
been formed by] interlined below cancelled lived with
authors] followed by x’d out to
On the other . . . Second Hadewijch.] added in lower margin
signs,] preceded by cancelled thoughts,
185–86 A German . . . sei!] opposite page
186 This is properly . . . the spirit.] opposite page
difference.”] preceded by cancelled distinction
6. In Hadewijch . . . Cross] opposite page
188 wherever] interlined above cancelled as
desires.] followed by cancelled IV
190 The “Second”] interlined above cancelled Deutero
191 loss in] followed by cancelled total
in whatever] preceded by illegible cancelled word
bareness] interlined above cancelled nakedness
192 not only] preceded by x’d out Out o
193 The place] preceded by x’d out Where the Lo
woman with a] preceded by x’d out typical
Christ, through] preceded by x’d out the
194 “purely invisible.”] quotation marks added
Even the orthodox . . . Church.] added on line
195 a Béguine] added on line
struggle . . . experiences.] added on line
Note: in . . . Béguine.] added in lower margin
Appendix A 369
196 see . . . Autobiography.] added on line

between me] me interlined above cancelled us
199 Although Eckhart . . . discretion.] opposite page
200 neo-Platonists.] followed by cancelled God as Creator
light] followed by cancelled centered
flowing] preceded by cancelled but above nature, in grace
confusions] followed by cancelled arising from
201 proprium] interlined with a caret
ground] preceded by illegible cancelled word
depth] followed by cancelled the [ ] element
got Eckhart] preceded by illegible cancelled word
regarding asceticism] added on line
problem] added in left margin to replace cancelled difficulty
as they stand.] followed by x’d out But without qualification
they probably do
202 note . . . diligere”] added on line
203 Note . . . hyperbole!] added on line
bold and careless] interlined below and marked for insertion
watch] preceded by x’d out take
heretical] interlined below x’d out erroneous and sapientes
haeresi
203–204 Considering . . . saints.] opposite page
204 Specific] added in left margin before cancelled His
Eckhart . . . pantheism] added on line
this is a misunderstanding] interlined
statements] preceded by illegible cancelled word
not to be regretted] added on line with sin is used by God etc.
interlined above and cancelled
N. 508 condemns] condemns altered from condemn preceded by
cancelled seems to
“not . . . sinned,”] quotation marks added
“without distinction.”] quotation marks added
(namely . . . present in the soul.] added on line
204–205 Though Pourrat . . . unfair.] opposite page
205 Oechslin, in] preceded by x’d out The question of
Eckhart’s] interlined above cancelled his
be read] followed by x’d out The errors as they stand in Denziger
even] added in left margin after cancelled perhaps
Eckhart is for . . . please.] added on line
survives] preceded by x’d out reached the Spanish
throughout] followed by cancelled much of
of Spain and France.] added on line
their influence] interlined below cancelled it

laid down] preceded by x’d out said
206 C. . . . Tauler] added in upper margin above cancelled Tauler
and Suso
Tauler and Suso] interlined above cancelled these two mystics
technical] interlined above cancelled professional
doctrine,] followed by cancelled based on
206–207 Psychology . . . pondus meum.] opposite page
207 of the word] followed by cancelled either to God or to self.
208 simple] interlined above cancelled pure
Eucharist] followed by cancelled (Daily com by [ ]
can only] preceded by cancelled must
withdraw] preceded by cancelled return
209 in yourself] yourself interlined above cancelled thyself
that creature] followed by cancelled is born in you.
210 and other points] interlined below Tauler and Eckhart
In general] added in left margin before cancelled First of all
211 with alert,] with interlined
212 a “friend of God.”] added on line
synthesis . . . contemplation.] added on line
doctrine,] followed by x’d out where Rhenish Mystics
213 figurative] preceded by x’d out language
however he . . . foolish.] added in lower margin and marked for
insertion
214 D] added in left margin
and followers] interlined with a caret
orthodoxy of] followed by x’d out Gerson
215 consider] added on line after cancelled see
This, with . . . non-mystical.] added on line followed by cancelled
16th Century: The Inquisition condemns all disapproves
the reading of all mystics, on general principles, at least
for general consumption. The Rhenish and Flemish
mystics are withdrawn from circulation, good and bad
alike.
as well as . . . trends.] added on line
centered on] preceded by x’d out A return to
matters] followed by cancelled and this is implicitly opposed to
contemplation or divorced from it.
extraordinary] followed by cancelled and by [ ] suspicious
There was] preceded by x’d out F. Radewijns
considerable] followed by cancelled and
discussion] followed by cancelled on
Appendix A 371
216 (fifteenth century)] interlined with a caret

demand] preceded by x’d out are
also] interlined
217 precursor] preceded by x’d out predecessor
218–19 Is this strictly true?] added on line
219 tried] followed by cancelled also
E. Summary and] interlined
clergy,] preceded by x’d out teaching Church teaching of the
Church
stress] followed by x’d out remarkable phenol
220 visible] preceded by x’d out Church
methods] followed by x’d out are to some ex
Protestants] preceded by x’d out those who seek God might hav
10] added in left margin
221 What is especially . . . all the Spanish mystics.] opposite page
Golden] preceded by cancelled Birth of Sp
Note the . . . until late.] opposite page
1472: . . . Torquemada] added in right margin
students] followed by cancelled in 16th cent.
222 compiled . . . Bible] added in right margin and marked with arrow
for insertion
1490, . . . seven years] added in left margin and marked with
arrow for insertion
1503 . . . Vita Christi] added after 1504 . . . Americas) and
marked with arrow for transposition
insists . . . contemplation] added in right margin and marked
with arrow for insertion
St. Bernard] interlined with a caret
225 In 1551, . . . tongue.] added in left margin and marked for
insertion
227 or for the learned] interlined with a caret
228 in Book . . . Gerson] added in left margin and marked for insertion
230 director] added in left margin
232 St. Teresa is very . . . good sense.] opposite page
as in the case . . . herself] interlined
For instance, . . . p. 9] opposite page
233 be persons] preceded by x’d out are
(twelfth century)] interlined with a caret
234 St. Teresa interprets . . . world. . . . ”] opposite page
send her] preceded by x’d out let
235 Carmelite theologians,] preceded by x’d out Fr Pedro Ibanez, a
Dominican, supports St. Theresa and encourages her to
go ahead
“While all] preceded by x’d out Carmelites
236 This sounds . . . 1.] added on line
a Carmelite] interlined with a caret above cancelled one
“purely . . . office)] interlined above x’d out meditation
How does . . . means.] added on line
This schema . . . herself.] added on line
(this term, . . . arbitrary)] added on line
237 emphasis on . . . reasoning.] interlined
Meditation in its . . . p. 233)] opposite page
this distinction . . . saint herself] interlined
Interior . . . 12:13] added on line
238 degree.] preceded by x’d out form
240 But “they have . . . 343] opposite page
241 A. The Nature of] interlined above cancelled 2
In making . . . to think.] opposite page
Without taking] preceded by cancelled This distinction is not at
all clear. Especially since some of them tend to identify
the prayer described in IV Mansion, c. 3 as “passive
recollection.” It becomes a very fine distinction and
one which would seem to be useless and misleading
especially since the dividing line between pre-contemplation
and infused contemplation is placed here. This is all the more
[followed by x’d out regrettab dubious] surprising since
for the Carmelites the passage from one to the other is
regarded as a crucial question.
academic] interlined
consider] preceded by cancelled rather
begins.] followed by x’d out She It is not completely clear whether
Does] added in left margin
apply] altered from applies
clear that] followed by x’d out the
She identifies . . . “supernatural.”] added on line
241–42 Note in IV.1 . . . satisfying.] opposite page
243 This in our . . . contemplation.] added on line
244 too rapid] interlined above cancelled careful
may] interlined with a caret
lead] altered from leads
Why? . . . of quiet.] added on line followed by cancelled I have
not found the words Prayer of Quiet in this chapter or
in this Mansion. In the Life, C 14, the term is used and the
prayer is formally discussed.
Appendix A 373
245 never quite hits] interlined below cancelled always misses

point.] followed by cancelled In the end it tends to falsify the
picture.
Whatever may be . . . love of God.] opposite page
246–47 remote way.] followed by x’d out This does not seem to be clear
247 effect, to be] preceded by x’d out some
248 4] preceded by x’d out 5
b)] added in left margin
249 c)] added in left margin
251 1. . . . Direction] interlined
others.] followed by x’d out The
technical] interlined with a caret
252 a religious] a interlined with a caret
offices or techniques] added in left margin before cancelled things
reverently] preceded by cancelled and
exploit] interlined above cancelled use
and of the community] interlined below and marked for insertion
to some school] to interlined below cancelled of
and Objections] added on line
Some seem . . . harmful.] interlined
is argued] is interlined below cancelled may be
that] added on line after x’d out that the whole mentality of the
view] interlined with a caret
a great deal] preceded by x’d out everything
the fifteenth century] interlined above cancelled then
253 (it is concluded)] interlined with a caret
f) . . . harmful.] opposite page
require] preceded by cancelled add
254 I.] added in left margin
II.] added in left margin
complete] followed by x’d out and guide
have more need] followed by x’d out of others
ergo, . . . special way] added on line
255 It is at . . . essential.] added on line
III.] added in left margin
a “prudent] preceded by x’d out by priests appo
IV.] added in left margin
256 really] interlined with a caret
We have not . . . problem.] added on line
mistake] interlined above cancelled wrong and misleading
perspective
In a very . . . now consider.] opposite page
view] followed by interlined and cancelled This view is not strictly

“wrong” but it is misleading and it tends to create more
problems than it solves
257 His functions . . . orders.] interlined
indicated] interlined above cancelled defined by chur
special function] followed by x’d out to
He exercises . . . humiliates the soul.] added in left margin and
marked for insertion
often] interlined with a caret
The director strictly . . . penitent.] interlined
the development] the interlined below cancelled its
“forming”] quotation marks added
considered as an “expert.”] added on line
often] interlined with a caret
united] followed by x’d out in confess
presents] preceded by x’d out subjects himself
at a fixed time] interlined with a caret
257–58 For the director . . . oracle.] added on line
258 view] followed by interlined and cancelled This view is not
completely wrong but it is so broad and so vague that it
does not fulfil the requirements of genuine direction
at least] preceded by cancelled but
The “director”] added in left margin before cancelled It
the name of] added in left margin and marked for insertion
example, . . . Walcheren.] interlined
259 no question] no altered from not followed by cancelled necessarily
any
formal authority] interlined below cancelled jurisdiction
260 or at least seemingly] interlined with a caret
not decisive . . . case.] added on line after cancelled overstepped
laypersons] preceded by x’d out laywomen
this would] this interlined above cancelled it
or to take . . . seriously.] added on line
(as opposed . . . authority)] interlined with a caret
In common] followed by x’d out view
260–61 He not only . . . be trusted] opposite page
261 and followed] preceded by cancelled He is to be trusted
that jargon] that altered from the
despotic] added in left margin
form.] followed by x’d out Less tress
262 matters.] followed by cancelled but only in foro externo.
We must distinguish . . . guide.] opposite page
Appendix A 375
in all the . . . interior life] interlined below and marked with

arrow for insertion
interventions . . . by superiors.] added in lower margin
263 just] interlined below cancelled but
dedication to wisdom.] followed by x’d out Only through his
mediatorship, for which no payment is adequate, can one
enter into this realm.
(philosophical instruction)] interlined with a caret
264 Christian] interlined above cancelled Oriental
in the Orient] interlined above added and cancelled (Orient)
265 each drive] each interlined below cancelled this
emphasis . . . paternity] interlined
shares in the action of] added in right margin and marked for
insertion to replace cancelled has a part in
guide] interlined above cancelled teacher
266 always] followed by x’d out along
See what . . . example.] added on line
267 C. Middle Ages] preceded by x’d out Medieval Period
the mendicants] added on line
The need . . . felt.] added on line
instructs the penitent] penitent altered from penitents
orient {the} penitent] penitent interlined above cancelled them
enter] preceded by cancelled then
writes] altered from write preceded by cancelled can
formal] interlined with a caret
268 over the seventy] over interlined above cancelled and
fruitful . . . mysticism.] added on line
outside] preceded by cancelled the
the parish] interlined with a caret
In the fifteenth . . . Fathers] added on line
After Trent . . . common.] added on line
269 function] followed by x’d out of the
Since manuals . . . specialists.] opposite page
distinguish] followed by cancelled between
from illuminism] from interlined above cancelled and
director {functions} . . . the mystic.] added on line
Direction . . . mysteries.] added on line
Certain new] interlined with a caret
(Barnabites, Theatines)] added on line
Direction is sometimes] preceded by cancelled These directors
concern themselves especially with the
270 The Jesuits: . . . less wise.] opposite page
Olier, Tronson] interlined with a caret

271 duty” penitent] penitent interlined above cancelled character
purpose] preceded by x’d out will
272 A too formal, . . . to this.] added on line
273 “for those . . . contemplation.”] quotation marks added
274 set in] interlined with a caret
(again, . . . A”)] added on line
It seems . . . matter.] added on line
as such] interlined with a caret
(He can . . . superior.)] added on line
as director] added in left margin and marked for insertion
does not] added in left margin and marked to replace cancelled has
no power to
274–75 In what . . . safely.] opposite page
275 the way to correspond] the interlined with a caret
To say . . . our docility.] added on line
because . . . personal.] added on line
See below . . . authority.] interlined
275–76 we have said . . . to the Holy Spirit.] opposite page
276 basic . . . praiseworthy.] added below and marked with arrow for
insertion
277 implies] interlined above cancelled has followed by x’d out infinite
code] preceded by x’d out [ ] and
Note . . . themselves.] added in lower margin after x’d out As
Physician
278 The director has to] The director added in left margin to replace
cancelled He
prescribe] interlined below cancelled lay down
for the regulation . . . monk.] interlined
279 labors] preceded by x’d out pitfalls
280 2. Direction and Therapy] added in upper margin
I] added in left margin
a)] added in left margin
though of course . . . counsel.] added on line
281 b) Secular counseling] interlined
or failing . . . conflict.] added on line
asked.] preceded by x’d out known and a
282 impression] followed by x’d out of the present
c) Catholic counseling] interlined
Note: . . . Law.] added in lower margin
often] interlined below and marked with arrow for insertion
283 Neurotic . . . uncharitableness.] opposite page
Appendix A 377
a)] added in left margin

b)] added in left margin
deeper] followed by x’d out than
c)] added in left margin
Psychoanalysis] preceded by x’d out Psychotherapy
personality.] preceded by x’d out inner
285 full] added in left margin
judge] followed by x’d out spiritual
wrongly] followed by x’d out in order to
aggravate] preceded by x’d out reinforce
neurotic] followed by x’d out but
and spiritual growth.] added on line
286 penitent is] followed by cancelled a
287 problem . . . community life.] interlined
when . . . guilt] added in right margin
clearly] added in left margin
Avoid] followed by cancelled psychology
288 False . . . type.] interlined
289 histrionic] followed by cancelled become
In general, . . . from others.] opposite page
crushed . . . consolation] added in left margin
may get . . . out.”] interlined above and marked with arrow for
insertion
290 Some general . . . of others.] opposite page
4. Don’t . . . not one.] added in right margin
3] added in left margin before cancelled 1
291 4] written over 2
penitent’s] interlined with a caret
5] written over 3
wars,] preceded by cancelled etc.
291–92 Psychologically . . . to growth.] opposite page
292 In the vocation . . . delicate.] opposite page
293 The main thing . . . passivity!)] opposite page
This may . . . here.] added on line
arise from] from interlined above cancelled between
294 set aside] preceded by cancelled suppressed
help] followed by cancelled prevent in dan
295 I] added in left margin before cancelled a)
Also it treats . . . least.] added on line
296 and of visions, . . . experiences] interlined with a caret
Christ] added in lower margin
297 1] added in left margin

298 vocation] followed by x’d out in the
299 typical case,] followed by x’d out though
300 a fixed] preceded by x’d out a priori demands
304 once there . . . of prayer] interlined with a caret
entertained by] interlined with a caret above cancelled of
306 presuming . . . to it] added on line
307 chapters] interlined above cancelled nn.
problem.] preceded by x’d out question.
from discursive . . . contemplation] interlined with a caret
308 Book II] interlined with a caret
1] followed by x’d out What does not consti
In particular . . . n. 6.] opposite page
spontaneous] interlined with a caret
vol. I] I interlined above cancelled II
309 The efforts . . . n. 7.)] added on line
310 the vocation . . . and that] interlined with a caret
One should . . . three signs.] interlined
affectively,] followed by x’d out as before
311 It is not contemplation. . . . against this.] added on line
312 More important, . . . passive prayer.] added in lower margin
3. . . . III] added in upper margin
3] interlined above cancelled 2
Inexperienced . . . directors] interlined with a caret above
cancelled They
313 can spoil] preceded by x’d out or the
316 left] preceded by x’d out led to
pleased to] preceded by x’d out disposed
mentioned] followed by cancelled (continue, Living Flame,
p. 185) followed by cancelled do not type this
The prudent . . . try] interlined with a caret above cancelled
Trying
“the way] followed by x’d out in
pressure.] followed by x’d out The point is that for spiritual
317 fill it] followed by x’d out without
319 person] preceded by x’d out soul
320 Finally] added in left margin
321 This section . . . well.] added on line
p. 351, . . . n. 5] added on line
322 is the “adolescence” . . . life.] added on line
Appendix A 379
Later . . . of St. John.] opposite page

323 so that . . . begin] interlined above cancelled in
(i.e., mystical life)] added on line
324 how the spiritual . . . aridity] added on line
quieting . . . grief] added on line
(c. 14)] added on line
325–26 Note {the} genuine . . . much harm.] added on line
326 detail] followed by x’d out with the book at our elbow always.
327 purges] preceded by x’d out is
328 greatness] followed by x’d out and
330 the “All”] the added on line
332 consecration] followed by x’d out to them
These too . . . may] interlined above cancelled It will
some] interlined below cancelled those who wish
upon] interlined below and marked for insertion
a typical] preceded by cancelled authorship?
because] followed by cancelled of its
333 solitudine] altered from solitudinis
meditating] interlined above cancelled and
Further . . . agere.] opposite page
Special . . . dulcedo.] opposite page
334 See . . . miraculosa.] opposite page
he takes . . . Scripture] interlined above cancelled example
335 and contrast] interlined
337 Caput 5] preceded on opposite page by (Do not type this) Our
lady in the world Dark night—God isolates the soul,
burning away bonds + attachments unites it to Himself.
acts in + through the soul united to Him—effects are now
of a different kind. Brainwashing – men play God’s part,
isolate the prisoner destroy bonds to old society + old
ways unite him to themselves in order to make him an
instrument. Difference DN alienation from outside +
lower self to full discovery of self in God (above one’s
own level) BW alienation from self, loss of self in the
totalitarian mass.
a man] interlined above cancelled the bad man
340 II] interlined before to Spiritual Direction
Reform and the] Reform interlined above cancelled Control
342 insisting] preceded by cancelled urging
Note . . . zero.] opposite page
in with others] followed by cancelled with
“confess”] followed by cancelled crimes he never committed
343 Note here . . . priest-prisoner.] opposite page

submission] followed by cancelled by
outstanding] followed by cancelled fact
346 personal deficiencies] preceded by cancelled Personal failures
APPENDIX B
FOR FURTHER READING
A. Other Writings by Merton on Topics Treated in An Introduc-

tion to Christian Mysticism
Ignatius of Antioch
“Church and Bishop in St. Ignatius of Antioch.” Seasons of Celebration.
New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux, 1965: 28–44.
Clement of Alexandria
Clement of Alexandria: Selections from the Protreptikos. New York: New
Directions, 1963.
“Clement of Alexandria.” Cassian and the Fathers: Initiation into the Mo-
nastic Tradition. MW1. Kalamazoo, MI: Cistercian Publications, 2005:
20–22.
Gregory of Nyssa
“Vision and Illusion.” Chapter 1 of The Ascent to Truth. New York: Har-
court, Brace, 1951: 21–29.
“St. Gregory of Nyssa.” Cassian and the Fathers, 52–60.
Evagrius
“Evagrius Ponticus on Prayer.” Cassian and the Fathers, 88–96.
Maximus the Confessor
“St. Maximus the Confessor on Non-Violence.” The Nonviolent Alternative,
ed. Gordon Zahn. New York: Farrar, Straus & Giroux, 1980: 172–77;
Passion for Peace: The Social Essays, ed. William H. Shannon. New York:
Crossroad, 1995: 242–47.
Augustine
Introduction to St. Augustine, The City of God, trans. Marcus Dods. New
York: Modern Library, 1950: ix–xv.
“The Christian in World Crisis: 3. War in Origen and St Augustine.”
Seeds of Destruction. New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux, 1964: 134–
51.
381
Meister Eckhart
“The Study of Zen.” Zen and the Birds of Appetite. New York: New Direc-
tions, 1968: 1–14.
Spiritual Direction
Spiritual Direction and Meditation. Collegeville, MN: Liturgical Press,
1960: 3–42.
“The Spiritual Father in the Desert Tradition.” Contemplation in a World
of Action. Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1971: 269–93.
“Spiritual Direction.” The Merton Seasonal, 32.1 (Spring 2007), 3–17.
John of the Cross
“The Transforming Union in St. Bernard and St. John of the Cross,”
Thomas Merton on St. Bernard. CS 9. Kalamazoo, MI: Cistercian Pub-
lications, 1980: 159–240.
The Ascent to Truth. New York: Harcourt, Brace, 1951.
“St. John of the Cross.” Saints for Now, ed. Clare Booth Luce, 1952; A
Thomas Merton Reader, ed. Thomas P. McDonnell. New York: Harcourt,
Brace, 1962: 306–14; rev. ed. Garden City, NY: Doubleday Image, 1974:
295–304.
Devotions in Honor of Saint John of the Cross. Philadelphia: Jefferies & Manz,
1953.
“Light in Darkness: The Ascetic Doctrine of St. John of the Cross.” Disputed
Questions. New York: Farrar, Straus and Cudahy, 1960: 208–17.
“Thomas Merton’s Practical Norms of Sanctity in St. John of the Cross,”
ed. Robert E. Daggy. Spiritual Life, 36.4 (Winter 1990): 195–201.
B. Significant Writings by Other Authors on Topics Treated in

An Introduction to Mystical Theology
General Studies
Bouyer, Louis, Jean Leclercq, and François Vandenbroucke. The History
of Christian Spirituality. Vol. 1: The Spirituality of the New Testament and
the Fathers. Trans. Mary P. Ryan. New York: Seabury, 1963; Vol. 2: The
Spirituality of the Middle Ages. Trans. Benedictines of Holme Eden
Abbey. New York: Seabury, 1968.
Clément, Olivier. The Roots of Christian Mysticism: Text and Commentary.
Hyde Park, NY: New City Press, 1995.
Jones, Cheslyn, Geoffrey Wainwright, and Edward Yarnold, eds. The
Study of Spirituality. New York: Oxford University Press, 1986.
Kannengiesser, Charles. Early Christian Spirituality. Philadelphia: Fortress,
1986.
Louth, Andrew. The Origins of the Christian Mystical Tradition from Plato
to Denys. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1981.
Appendix B 383
McGinn, Bernard, John Meyendorff, and Jean Leclercq, eds. Christian

Spirituality: Origins to the Twelfth Century. World Spirituality: An En-
cyclopedic History of the Religious Quest, vol. 16. New York: Cross-
road, 1985.
McGinn, Bernard. The Presence of God: A History of Western Christian
Mysticism. Vol. 1: The Foundations of Mysticism: Origins to the Fifth
Century. New York: Crossroad, 1992; Vol. 2: The Growth of Mysticism:
Gregory the Great through the 12th Century. New York: Crossroad, 1994;
Vol. 3: The Flowering of Mysticism: Men and Women in the New Mysti-
cism—1200–1350. New York: Crossroad, 1998; Vol. 4: The Harvest of
Mysticism in Medieval Germany —1300–1500. New York: Crossroad,
2005.
Raitt, Jill, ed. Christian Spirituality II: High Middle Ages and Reformation.
World Spirituality: An Encyclopedic History of the Religious Quest,
vol. 17. New York: Crossroad, 1987.
Spidlík, Tomás. The Spirituality of the Christian East: A Systematic Handbook.
Trans. Anthony P. Gythiel. CS 79. Kalamazoo: Cistercian Publications,
1986.
Williams, Rowan. The Wound of Knowledge: Christian Spirituality from the
New Testament to St. John of the Cross. London: Darton, Longman and
Todd, 1979.
Ignatius of Antioch
Ignatius of Antioch. Trans. Robert M. Grant. The Apostolic Fathers: A New
Translation and Commentary, vol. 4. Camden, NJ: Nelson, 1966.
*****
Corwin, Virginia. St. Ignatius and Christianity in Antioch. New Haven:
Yale University Press, 1960.
Trevett, Christine. A Study of Ignatius of Antioch in Syria and Asia. Lewis
ton, NY: Mellen, 1992.
Clement of Alexandria
Alexandrian Christianity: Selected Translations of Clement and Origen. Ed.
J. E. L. Oulton and Henry Chadwick. Library of Christian Classics,
vol. 2. Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1954.
Christ the Educator. Trans. Simon P. Wood. Fathers of the Church, vol. 23.
New York: Fathers of the Church, 1954.
The Exhortation to the Greeks; The Rich Man’s Salvation; and the Fragment
of an Address Entitled, To the Newly Baptized. Trans. G. W. Butterworth.
Loeb Classical Library. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press,
1968.
*****
Ferguson, John. Clement of Alexandria. New York: Twayne, 1974.
Hägg, Henny Fiska. Clement of Alexandria and the Beginnings of Christian

Apophaticism. New York: Oxford University Press, 2006.
Lilla, Salvatore. Clement of Alexandria: A Study in Christian Platonism and
Gnosticism. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1971.
Osborn, Eric. Clement of Alexandria. Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press, 2005.
Gregory of Nyssa
Ascetical Works. Trans. Virginia Woods Callahan. Fathers of the Church,
vol. 58. Washington, DC: Catholic University of America Press, 1967.
Commentary on the Song of Songs. Trans. Casimir McCambley. Brookline,
MA: Hellenic College Press, 1987.
From Glory to Glory: Texts from Gregory of Nyssa’s Mystical Writings. Ed.
Jean Daniélou and Herbert Musurillo. New York: Scribners, 1961.
The Letters. Trans. Anna M. Silvas. Leiden: Brill, 2007.
The Life of Moses. Trans. Everett Ferguson and Abraham J. Malherbe.
Classics of Western Spirituality. New York: Paulist, 1978.
Life of Saint Macrina. Trans. Kevin Corrigan. Toronto: Peregrina, 1987.
The Lord’s Prayer. The Beatitudes. Trans. Hilda C. Graef. Ancient Christian
Writers, vol. 18. Westminster, MD: Newman, 1954.
The Soul and the Resurrection. Trans. Catharine P. Roth. Crestwood, NY:
St. Vladimir’s Seminary Press, 1993.
Treatise on the Inscriptions of the Psalms. Trans. Ronald E. Heine. New
York: Oxford University Press, 1995.
*****
Balthasar, Hans Urs von. Presence and Thought: Essay on the Religious
Philosophy of Gregory of Nyssa. Trans. Mark Sebanc. San Francisco:
Ignatius Press, 1995.
Laird, Martin. Gregory of Nyssa and the Grasp of Faith: Union, Knowledge,
and Divine Presence. New York: Oxford University Press, 2004.
Meredith, Anthony. Gregory of Nyssa. New York: Routledge, 1999.
Smith, J. Warren. Passion and Paradise: Human and Divine Emotion in the
Thought of Gregory of Nyssa. New York: Crossroad, 2004.
Evagrius Ponticus
The Praktikos; Chapters on Prayer. Trans. John Eudes Bamberger. CS 4.
Spencer, MA: Cistercian Publications, 1970.
Ad Monachos. Trans. Jeremy Driscoll. Ancient Christian Writers, vol. 59.
New York: Paulist Press, 2003.
The Greek Ascetic Corpus. Trans. Robert E. Sinkewicz. New York: Oxford
University Press, 2003.
*****
Appendix B 385
Driscoll, Jeremy. The “Ad Monachos” of Evagrius Ponticus: Its Structure

and a Select Commentary. Studia Anselmiana, 104. Rome: Pontificio
Ateneo S. Anselmo, 1991.
———. The Mind’s Long Journey to the Holy Trinity: The Ad Monachos of
Evagrius Ponticus. Collegeville, MN: Liturgical Press, 1993.
———. Steps to Spiritual Perfection: Studies on Spiritual Progress in Evagrius
Ponticus. New York: Newman Press, 2005.
Dysinger, Luke. Psalmody and Prayer in the Writings of Evagrius Ponticus.
New York: Oxford University Press, 2005.
Maximus the Confessor
The Ascetic Life; The Four Centuries on Charity. Trans. Polycarp Sherwood.
Ancient Christian Writers, vol. 21. Westminster, MD: Newman Press,
1955.
On the Cosmic Mystery of Jesus Christ: Selected Writings from St. Maximus
the Confessor. Trans. Paul M. Blowers and Robert Louis Wilken. Popular
Patristics Series. Crestwood, NY: St. Vladimir’s Seminary Press, 2003.
Selected Writings. Trans. George C. Berthold. Classics of Western Spir-
ituality. New York: Paulist Press, 1985.
*****
Balthasar, Hans Urs von. Cosmic Liturgy: The Universe according to Maxi
mus the Confessor. Trans. Brian E. Daley. San Francisco: Ignatius Press,
2003.
Cooper, Adam. Body in St. Maximus the Confessor: Holy Flesh, Wholly
Deified. New York: Oxford University Press, 2005.
Louth, Andrew. Maximus the Confessor. Early Church Fathers Series. New
York: Routledge, 1996.
Thunberg, Lars. Man and the Cosmos: The Vision of St. Maximus the Confessor.
Crestwood, NY: St. Vladimir’s Seminary Press, 1985.
———. Microcosm and Mediator: The Theological Anthropology of Maximus
the Confessor. 2nd ed. Chicago: Open Court, 1995.
Pseudo-Dionysius
The Complete Works. Trans. Colm Luibheid. Classics of Western Spiritu-
ality. New York: Paulist Press, 1987.
*****
Gersh, Stephen. From Iamblichus to Eriugena: An Investigation of the Pre
history and Evolution of the Pseudo-Dionysian Tradition. Leiden: Brill,
1978.
Hathaway, Ronald F. Hierarchy and the Definition of Order in the Letters of
Pseudo-Dionysius: A Study in the Form and Meaning of the Pseudo-
Dionysian Writings. The Hague, Nijhoff, 1969.
Louth, Andrew. Denys the Areopagite. Wilton, CT: Morehouse, 1989.

Rorem, Paul. Pseudo-Dionysius: A Commentary on the Texts and an Introduc
tion to Their Influence. New York: Oxford University Press, 1993.
Augustine
The Complete Works of Saint Augustine. Ed. John E. Rotelle, osa. 34 vols.
to date. Hyde Park, NY: New City Press, 1997– .
Confessions. Trans. Henry Chadwick. New York: Oxford University Press,
1991.
Major Writings. Ed. Benedict J. Groeschel. New York: Crossroad, 1995.
Selected Writings. Trans. Mary T. Clark. Classics of Western Spirituality.
New York: Paulist Press, 1984.
*****
Brown, Peter. Augustine of Hippo: A Biography. Berkeley: University of
California Press, 1967.
Burnaby, John. Amor Dei: A Study of the Religion of St. Augustine. London:
Hodder & Stoughton, 1960.
Chadwick, Henry. Augustine. New York: Oxford University Press,
1986.
Clark, Mary T. Augustine. Washington, DC: Georgetown University
Press, 1994.
O’Donnell, James J. Augustine. Boston: Twayne, 1985.
———. Augustine: A New Biography. New York: Ecco, 2005.
Scott, T. Kermit. Augustine: His Thought in Context. New York: Paulist
Press, 1995.
Sullivan, John. Image of God: The Doctrine of St. Augustine and Its Influence.
Dubuque, IA: Priory Press, 1963.
TeSelle, Eugene. Augustine. Nashville: Abingdon Press, 2006.
Joachim of Flora
Apocalyptic Spirituality: Treatises and Letters of Lactantius, Adso of Montier-
en-Der, Joachim of Fiore, the Franciscan Spirituals, Savonarola. Trans.
Bernard McGinn. Classics of Western Spirituality. New York: Paulist
Press, 1979.
*****
McGinn, Bernard. The Calabrian Abbot: Joachim of Fiore in the History of
Western Thought. New York: Macmillan, 1985.
Reeves, Marjorie. Influence of Prophecy in the Later Middle Ages: A Study
in Joachimism. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1969.
———. Joachim of Fiore and the Prophetic Future. New York: Harper &
Row, 1977.
Tavard, George H. Contemplative Church: Joachim and His Adversaries.
Milwaukee: Marquette University Press, 2005.
Appendix B 387
Wessley, Stephen E. Joachim of Fiore and Monastic Reform. New York: Peter
Lang, 1990.
Francis
Francis and Clare: The Complete Works. Classics of Western Spirituality.
Trans. Regis Armstrong, ofmcap, and Ignatius C. Brady, ofm. New
York: Paulist Press, 1982.
Francis of Assisi: Early Documents. Ed. Regis Armstrong, William Short
and J. A. Wayne Hellmann. 4 vols. Hyde Park, NY: New City Press,
1999–2002.
St. Francis of Assisi: English Omnibus of Sources. Ed. Marion A. Habig.
4th ed. Chicago: Franciscan Herald Press, 1983.
*****
Boff, Leonardo. Francis of Assisi: A Model for Human Liberation. Maryknoll,
NY: Orbis, 2006.
Cunningham, Lawrence S. Francis of Assisi: Performing the Gospel Life.
Grand Rapids, MI: W. B. Eerdmans, 2004.
Fortini, Arnaldo. Francis of Assisi. New York: Crossroad, 1981.
Bonaventure
Bonaventure: Mystical Writings. Ed. Zachary Hayes (New York: Crossroad,
1999).
The Soul’s Journey into God, The Tree of Life, The Life of St. Francis. Trans.
Ewert Cousins. Classics of Western Spirituality. New York: Paulist
Press, 1978.
The Works of Bonaventure. Trans. José de Vinck. 5 vols. Patterson, NJ:
St. Anthony Guild Press, 1960–70.
Works of Saint Bonaventure. 9 vols. to date. St. Bonaventure, NY: Francis-
can Institute Press, 1955–.
*****
Bougerol, Jacques Guy. Introduction to the Works of Bonaventure. Paterson,
NJ: St. Anthony Guild Press, 1964.
Cousins, Ewert H. Bonaventure and the Coincidence of Opposites: The
Theology of Bonaventure. Chicago: Franciscan Herald Press, 1978.
Delio, Ilia, OSF. Crucified Love: Bonaventure’s Mysticism of the Crucified
Christ. Quincy, IL: Franciscan Press, 1998.
———. Simply Bonaventure: An Introduction to His Life, Thought, and Writ-
ings. Hyde Park, NY: New City Press, 2000.
Hayes, Zachary. The Hidden Center: Spirituality and Speculative Christology
in St. Bonaventure. New York: Paulist Press, 1981.
Hadewijch
The Complete Works. Trans. Mother Columba Hart. Classics of Western
Spirituality. New York: Paulist Press, 1980.
*****
Dreyer, Elizabeth. Passionate Spirituality: Hildegard of Bingen and Hadewijch
of Brabant. New York: Paulist Press, 2005.
Mommaers, Paul, with Elizabeth Dutton. Hadewijch: Writer, Beguine, Love
Mystic. Louvain: Peeters, 2004.
Eckhart
Meister Eckhart: Teacher and Preacher. Ed. Bernard McGinn. Classics of
Western Spirituality. New York: Paulist Press, 1986.
The Essential Sermons, Commentaries, Treatises and Defense. Trans. Edmund
Colledge and Bernard McGinn. Classics of Western Spirituality. New
*****
Davies, Oliver. Meister Eckhart: Mystical Theologian. London: SPCK, 1991.
Hollywood, Amy. Soul as Virgin Wife: Mechthild of Magdeburg, Marguerite
Porete, and Meister Eckhart. Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame
Press, 1995.
McGinn, Bernard, ed. Meister Eckhart and the Beguine Mystics: Hadewijch
of Brabant, Mechthild of Magdeburg, and Marguerite Porete. New York:
Continuum, 1994.
McGinn, Bernard. The Mystical Thought of Meister Eckhart: The Man from
Whom God Hid Nothing. New York: Crossroad, 2001.
Smith, Cyprian. Way of Paradox: Spiritual Life as Taught by Meister Eckhart.
London: Darton Longman & Todd, 1987.
Tobin, Frank. Meister Eckhart: Thought and Language. Philadelphia: Uni-
versity of Pennsylvania Press, 1986.
Woods, Richard. Eckhart’s Way. Wilmington, DE: Michael Glazier, 1986.
Tauler
Sermons. Trans. Maria Shrady. Classics of Western Spirituality. New York:
Paulist Press, 1985.
Theologia Germanica
Theologia Germanica of Martin Luther. Trans. Bengt Hoffman. Classics of
Theologia Germanica: The Way to a Sinless Life. Ed. Thomas S. Kepler.
Cleveland: World Publishing Co., 1952.
Osuna
The Third Spiritual Alphabet. Trans. Mary E. Giles. Classics of Western
*****
Calvert, Laura. Francisco de Osuna and the Spirit of the Letter. Portland, OR:
International Scholarly Book Service, 1973.
Appendix B 389
Ignatius of Loyola
Spiritual Exercises and Selected Works. Ed. George E. Ganss, sj. Classics of
*****
Caraman, Philip. Ignatius Loyola: A Biography of the Founder of the Jesuits.
San Francisco: Harper & Row, 1990.
Egan, Harvey. Ignatius Loyola the Mystic. Wilmington, DE: Michael
Glazier, 1987.
Lonsdale, David. Eyes to See, Ears to Hear: An Introduction to Ignatian
Spirituality. New York: Orbis, 2000.
Silf, Margaret. Companions of Christ: Ignatian Spirituality for Everyday
Living. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2004.
Teresa of Avila
Collected Letters. Vol. 1. Trans. Kieran Kavanaugh, ocd. Washington, DC:
Institute of Carmelite Studies, 2001.
Collected Works. 3 vols. Trans. Kieran Kavanaugh, ocd and Otilio
Rodriguez, ocd. Washington, DC: Institute of Carmelite Studies,
1976–85.
The Interior Castle. Trans. Kieran Kavanaugh, ocd and Otilio Rodriguez,
ocd. Classics of Western Spirituality. New York: Paulist Press, 1979.
Mystical Writings. Ed. Tessa Bielecki. New York: Crossroad, 1999.
*****
Bielecki, Tessa. Teresa of Avila: An Introduction to Her Life and Writings.
Tunbridge Wells: Burns & Oates, 1994.
Frohlich, Mary. Intersubjectivity of the Mystic: A Study of Teresa of Avila’s
Interior Castle. Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1993.
Luti, J. Mary. Teresa of Avila’s Way. Collegeville, MN: Liturgical Press,
1991.
Williams, Rowan. Teresa of Avila. New York: Continuum, 2003.
John of the Cross
Collected Works. Trans. Kieran Kavanaugh, ocd and Otilio Rodriguez,
ocd. Revised ed. Washington, DC: Institute of Carmelite Studies,
1991.
Selected Writings. Trans. Kieran Kavanaugh, ocd. Classics of Western
*****
Arraj, James. From St. John of the Cross to Us. Chiloquin, OR: Inner Growth
Books, 1999.
Collings, Ross. John of the Cross. Collegeville, MN: Liturgical Press, 1990.
Dicken, E. W. Truman. Crucible of Love: A Study of the Mysticism of

St. Teresa of Jesus and St. John of the Cross. New York: Sheed and Ward,
1963.
Dombrowski, Daniel A. St. John of the Cross: An Appreciation. Albany: State
University of New York Press, 1992.
Doohan, Leonard. Life and Vision of John of the Cross. Notre Dame, IN:
Ave Maria Press, 1995.
Herrera, R. A. Silent Music: The Life, Work, and Thought of St. John of the
Cross. Grand Rapids, MI: W. B. Eerdmans, 2004.
Kavanaugh, Kieran. John of the Cross: Doctor of Light and Love. New York:
Crossroad, 1999.
Welch, John. When Gods Die: An Introduction to John of the Cross. New
Guigo the Carthusian
The Ladder of Monks: A Letter on the Contemplative Life and Twelve Medita-
tions. Trans. Edmund Colledge and James Walsh. CS 48. Kalamazoo,
MI: Cistercian Publications, 1981.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Cistercian Publications gratefully acknowledges permission to cite the

following works:
The Correspondence of Thomas Merton: The Hidden Ground of Love of Love:

Letters on Religious Experience and Social Concerns. New York: Farrar, Straus
& Giroux, 1985. Quoted with permission.
The Journals of Thomas Merton: Turning toward the World: The Pivotal Years.
Journals, volume 4: 1960–1963. San Francisco: HarperCollins Publishers,
1996. Quoted with permission.
The Apostolic Fathers, trans. Francis X. Glimm, Joseph M.-F. Marique, sj,
Gerald G. Walsh, sj. Fathers of the Church series. Washington DC: The
Catholic University of America Press, 1947. Used with permission.
Dom Cuthbert Butler, Western Mysticism: The Teaching of SS. Augustine,
Gregory and Bernard on Contemplation and the Contemplative Life, 2nd ed.
London: Constable, 1926. Used with permission.
E. Allison Peers, Studies of the Spanish Mystics, 2 volumes. second ed.
London: SPCK, 1951. Used with permission.
The Complete Works of Saint John of the Cross, ed. and trans. E. Allison Peers,
volumes 1 & 3. Westminster, MD: Newman Press, 1946. Used with per-
mission.
The Complete Works of Saint Teresa of Jesus, trans. and ed. E. Allison Peers,
volume 2. New York: Sheed & Ward, 1946. Used with permission.
391
INDEX
Aaron: 63 Alcala, University of: 221

abandonment: 104, 106, 189, 198, 202, Alexandria: xli, 49, 52
205, 223 Alice of Schaerbeek, Bl.: 184
Abbo, John A.: 278 alienation: 311
Abelard: 146, 150 Allchin, A. M.: xxx
abnegation: 19–21 almsgiving: 103, 233
abstinence: 236 alumbrados: 221, 223–24, 227, 270
acedia: 262 Alvarez, Balthasar, sj: 218, 297–98
Acquaviva, Claudio, sj: 219 Alvarez de Paz, Diego, sj: 219, 273
act(s): 187, 309, 320; discursive: 311; ambivalence: 344–45
interior: 314–15; of love: 319 Ambrose, St.: 157
action(s): 30, 129, 175, 198, 212, 301; amendment: 271–72
divine: 237, 304, 313, 316, 327 America: 226
activism: 157, 289 Americanism: 254
activity: xxxi, 55, 135, 143, 187, 207, Ancelet-Hustache, Jeanne: 199
210, 212, 215, 223, 238, 304, 315, Andrews, Edward Deming: xl
320, 331, 334 angel(s): 46, 63, 70–71, 78, 88, 100,
Adam of Perseigne: 261–62, 266 110–11, 113–16, 122–23, 125, 139–
Adam the Carthusian: 145 42, 150, 162, 174, 298
adoption, divine: 51, 58 Angela of Foligno, Bl.: 222
adoration: 70 anger: 108, 114, 134
aestheticism: 23 anguish: 209, 239, 298, 309, 323, 330
Aetius: xxviii annihilation: 174, 195, 304, 326, 329,
affection(s): 106, 179–81, 277, 326–27, 331, 345
330 anointings: 313, 315
affectivity: 153, 155, 216, 220, 237–38 Anomeanism: xxviii, 76–77
affliction(s): 47, 306, 309, 312, 327–29 Anselm, St.: 148, 172
agape: 39, 54, 79, 101, 105, 141 antagonism: 344–45
Ailred (Aelred) of Rievaulx, St.: 33, Anthony, St.: 128, 157
217–18, 332 anthropology: 158
Albert the Great, St.: 149–50, 153, 196, Antioch: xli
200, 220, 254 Antoninus of Florence, St.: 273
Albigensians: 173, 181 Antwerp: 226
393
anxiety: 287, 291, 309 auditions: xxxvi

apatheia: 78, 101–107, 109–10, 115, Augustine, St.: ix, xxvii, 30–31, 57, 86,
119–21, 129, 132, 134, 265 93, 124–25, 147–48, 150, 154–55,
apathy: 311 157–68, 171, 178, 185, 201, 206–207,
apex affectus: 90, 152 215, 222, 228; works: Confessions:
apex mentis: 156, 178, 180 160–62, 164, 166–67, 207; De Diversis
apex spiritus: 152–53 Quaestionibus: 162; Enarrationes in
apocalypticism: 172, 196 Psalmos: 160–61, 164–66; Homilies
Apollinarianism: 66 on I John: 160; In Johannem: 164;
Apollinaris: 73 Sermons: 159, 161
apophaticism: xxvii, 17, 77, 81, 85, Augustinianism: 145, 147–48, 150–51,
142, 160, 163, 165 155, 169, 206–207
apostasy: 46 Augustinians: 170
apostles: 40, 44 austerity: 133
apostolate: 219 authority: xxxv, 257–58, 260–61, 300
Arabians: 98 autonomy: 344
Aratus: 58 Averroism: 223
Archimedes: 189 Avignon: xliv, 203
Arianism: xxviii, 60–61, 65–66, 76 Avila, Juan de, Bl.: 225–26
aridity: 298, 306, 308–309, 311–12, 315, awe: 81, 108, 161
323–24, 339 Aziz, Abdul: xii, xxix, xliii
Arintero, Juan, op: 27–28
Aristotelianism: 169 Babel: 306
Aristotle: 55, 124, 150 Bainvel, J. V.: 25, 27
Arnold of Brescia: 173 Balthasar, Hans Urs von: viii, xxii–xxiii,
Arraj, James: xxxiii xxx, 31, 36–37, 97, 99, 123–24, 126–
art(s): xxxii, 36, 126, 132–35, 315 28, 131–32, 135
ascent: by love: 150–51; gnostic: 53, baptism: xxxiii, 27, 38, 41, 46, 63, 69,
101; mystical: 50, 56, 78–79, 117, 85, 89, 141, 258, 327, 338
159–60, 163, 167, 178, 194, 226, 320; Baptista de Cremona: 269
of mind: 58, 108, 114; of prayer: 114 Bardy, Gustave: 47, 53, 103–104
ascetic(s): 19, 47 Barillari, Sonia: 170
asceticism: xx, xxiv, xxx, xxxii–xxxiii, Barnabites: 269
16, 19–22, 46, 50, 54, 92, 101–103, Baron, Roger: 146
105–106, 115, 142, 154, 156, 159, 182, Basil, St.: 51, 62, 72, 75–76, 79, 98, 222
201, 207, 212, 216, 226, 265, 276, beatitudes: 89, 177
284–85, 290, 320–21; false: 288 Beatrice of Nazareth, Bl.: 184–86, 196
Astrain, Antonio: 224 beauty: 133, 135, 164, 314, 335
Athanasius, St.: xxiv, 16, 51, 60–62, 66 Beck, Edmund, osb: 48
Athens: 138 Beghards: 182–84, 210, 219, 223
attachment(s): 208, 312 Béguines: xv–xvi, xxxviii, xlv–xlvi,
attentiveness: 231, 311, 318 182–86, 188, 192–93, 195–96, 219,
attributes, divine: 139 267
Index 395
Benedict, St.: xiii, 3, 84, 107, 170, 277 Bouyer, Louis: 26, 32, 49, 59, 67, 69–71,
Benedictines: xxxiv, 31, 154, 168, 171, 98, 104
199, 214, 217, 236 brainwashing: xix, liv, 340–47
Benjamin: 147 Brautmystik: 155, 185
Bergson, Henri: 23, 30 Brethren of the Common Life: 215–16
Bernard, St.: xxv, xxvii, 18, 30–31, 33, Brethren of the Free Spirit: 181, 210,
36, 55, 63–64, 74–75, 84, 93, 114, 254
145, 147–49, 154, 168–72, 175, 185– Bridget of Sweden, St.: 193, 214
86, 190, 192–93, 196–97, 202, 219, Brook, Z. N.: 3
222, 332, 336, 338 Brothers of the Apostles: 181
Bernières, Jean de: 270 Buddhism: 33, 76, 97, 263
Berthelot du Chesnay, Charles: 263, Burdick, Jeanne: 88
270, 274 Butler, Cuthbert, osb: xxvii, xxxiv, 19,
Bérulle, Pierre de: 270 24–25, 27–31, 145, 148, 165–70
betrothal, spiritual: 239, 325
Bible: 27, 83–84, 146, 157, 171, 225 Caesar of Heisterbach: 170
Biddle, Arthur W.: xi Cafasso, Giuseppe: 255
bios praktikos: xxxii, 21–22, 109, 279 Cajetan of Thiene, St.: 269
bios theoretikos: xxxii, 22, 114 Calabria: 172
birth, divine: 207, 209 calm: 21
bishop(s): 45, 140–41, 164, 266, 269, Camelot, T., op: 60
286 Camus, J. P.: 216–17
Black Death: 196 Canévet, M.: 73
Blakney, Raymond: 199, 201, 203 Canisius, Peter, St.: 210, 270
Blessed Sacrament: 181, 183 Cano, Melchior, op: 224
blessedness: 317, 340 Cappadocia: 98
blessings: 308, 313, 328, 330 Cappadocians: 16, 58, 66, 71–77, 154
Bloy, Léon: 258–59 Cappuyns, Maïeul: 73–74
Bochen, Christine M.: xliii, xlv, lii, 251 Cardenal, Ernesto: xliii
Bonaventure, St.: ix, 83, 86, 89, 148–53, Carmelites: ix, xiv, xxxiii, 17, 26–27,
155, 172, 176–81, 214–15, 219, 228; 154, 174, 189, 219–20, 232–51, 296–
works: Collationes in Hexaemeron: 97
180–81; Commentary on Luke: 177– Carnandet, Ioannis: 169
78; Commentary on the Sentences: Carthusians: xxxviii, 75, 152, 154, 214
180; De Reductione Artium ad Cassant, Joseph, Bl.: 288
Theologiam: 148, 177–78; De Triplici Cassian, John: xv, xxi, 74, 97, 100, 103,
Via: 150, 177–78; Itinerarium: 151, 105, 154–55, 169, 171, 196, 236, 266
153, 177–81; Sermo V in Epiphania: cataphaticism: xxviii, 151, 163
153 Cathars: xxxviii
Borgia, Francis, St.: 225 Catherine of Genoa, St.: xlvii, 25, 194–
Bossuet, Jacques Benigne: 75, 217, 238 95, 328–29
Botte, B., osb: 42 Catherine of Siena, St.: 182, 193–94,
Bousset, Wilhelm: 99 214, 222, 270
Catholic Youth Encyclopedia: xvii 269; rebirth in: 38; resurrection of:
Caussade, Jean Pierre de, sj: 274 xxiv, xxxiii, xlv; risen: 42, 132, 295;
Cavallera, Ferdinand, sj: 71 rising with: 41, 43, 46, 48, 60;
celibacy: 103 sacrifice of: 63; sufferings of: 86,
Cepeda, Lorenzo de: 270 296; union with: 43, 67; unity in:
Chalcedon, Council of: 138 127; victory of: 122; words of: 40;
charism(s): 108 wounds of: 192
charity: 39, 45, 49, 54–55, 59, 86, 90, Christine of Belgium, St.: 184
104, 107, 119, 158, 160, 163, 179, Christine of Stommeln, St.: 184
192, 211, 215–16, 236, 255, 261–62, Church: x, xxiii–xxiv, xxxiv, xxxviii,
280, 285, 289, 295, 302, 323 xlvi–xlvii, xlix, 15, 19, 30, 35–36, 39,
chastity: 19, 111, 122, 183 41–42, 45, 49–50, 60, 64–66, 85, 158,
Chaucer, Geoffrey: xlvii 163–67, 172–75, 181, 183, 187, 193–
Chenevière, Étienne, ocso: 288 94, 199, 212–13, 220, 249, 252–57,
Chenu, M.-D., op: 57, 150 260, 262, 266, 271–72, 274–77, 282,
Chevallier, Philippe: 143, 145 285, 288, 295, 298, 300, 332; Eastern:
Chinese: 341–47 xxxiv, xxxvii, 91; Western: 29
Chiquot, A.: 171, 197, 212 Cicero: 157
Christ: xlix, 19, 44, 46, 50, 52, 70, 125, circumincession: 39
177, 179, 183, 193–94, 198, 255, Cistercians: xxi, xxv–xxvi, xxxiv–xxxv,
265–66, 275–76, 317; abiding in: xxxviii, 18, 32, 57, 63–65, 74, 90,
40; as Bridegroom: 95, 114; as 114, 134, 148–49, 154–55, 171–72,
Redeemer: 255; as Savior: 48; as 184–86, 190, 196, 199, 218, 267, 288
Spouse: 86, 151, 178, 180, 187, 337– Clark, James M.: 199
39; as true law: 127; as Word: xxiv, Clement of Alexandria: xxiv, xl–xliii,
38, 51; blood of: 132; Body of: 39, li–lii, 16, 48–49, 52–59, 68, 72, 75;
50, 69, 285; born in soul: 198, 200; works: Eclogae Propheticae: 54;
conformation to: 21; crucified: Paedagogos: xl; Protreptikos: xl–xliii,
151, 174, 192, 194, 248; death of: lii, 56, 59; Stromata: xl–xli, 52–56,
xxiv, xxxiii, xlv, 51, 62; devotion 59, 75
to: 213; divinity of: 66; dying with: clergy: 156, 171–72, 174, 194–95, 198,
41, 43, 46, 276; experience of: 35; 215–16, 219
following: xxiv, 19, 39, 43, 198, 278; cloud: 78, 163
glorification of: 174; humanity of: Cloud of Unknowing: xlvii–xlviii, 145,
66–67, 85–86, 201, 216, 227; imita- 153
tion of: 209; in us: 223; journey Cognet, Louis: 26
with: xxxiii; life in: xxxiii, 38–39, Colledge, Eric: xlviii, 145, 162, 206
49, 64, 267, 276; life of: xxxiii; Cologne: 153–54, 184, 196, 199, 203,
likeness to: 175; love of: 41, 124, 206
161, 194, 248; members of: 62, 295; Columbus, Christopher: 221
mystery of: xxvi, l, 40–42, 65, 68, combat, spiritual: 279
171, 269; mystical: 121; obeying: 40; Combs, André: 153
passion of: 45, 174, 179, 215–16, 226, comfort: 316
Index 397
commandment(s): 39–40, 85, 110, 222, 227, 230, 232, 234–36, 241–42,
331–32 244–45, 250, 265, 271, 301, 306,
communes: 174 314, 319, 325–26, 329, 332–34, 337–
communion: 223, 225, 321; with God: 40; acquired: xxxiii, 17, 25, 121,
xxviii, 59, 79, 305 235, 238, 241, 245, 307, 310; active:
Communism, Chinese: 341–47 337; and action: lii, 30, 129, 175,
community: xix, 50, 164, 183, 216, 233, 198, 212; apophatic: 81; arid: 323;
264, 287, 292–93, 316; monastic: call to: 246–51; divine: 331; false:
xxxv–xxxvii, 294 35, 130; hidden: 251; imageless:
compulsion: 283, 291 xxx; infused: xxxiii, 17, 22, 25, 121,
compunction: 136, 340 235, 238, 241, 243, 245, 307, 310, 327,
concern: 277 337; masked: 250–51; monastic: 168;
concupiscence: 108, 146, 159, 179 mystical: 53, 67, 69–71, 178, 246,
conferences: mystical theology: vii– 248, 273; natural: xxix–xxx, 100,
viii, xi–xx, xxii, xxvii, xxxv–xxxvii, 110, 121, 125; of the Trinity: 100,
xxxix–xl, xliii, xlv, xlvii, xlix–li; 115, 117; passive: 337; quiet: 314;
novitiate: vii–viii, xi, xviii, xx–xxii, sapiential: 180; simple: 310;
xxxvi solitary: 314; spiritual: 122
confessio directiva: 268 controversies, Christological: xv
confessio sacramentalis: 268 conversatio morum: 236
confession: 213, 257, 267–68, 271–72, conversation: 261–62
313, 341, 342–46 conversion: xix, 80, 155, 207, 341
confessor: 255, 271–73, 297–98, 301– Coomaraswamy, Ananda: 35
302, 306, 313, 316 Coomaraswamy, Luisa: xvii, xliii
confidence: 307 Cooper, David D.: xlii
conflict: 328, 336 Corin, A. L.: 207–10
conformity: 281 Corpus Christi, Feast of: 169
Connolly, Terence, sj: 64 correction: 277
Conrad of Eberbach: 170 counsel: 277
conscience: 146, 257, 264–65, 275, 287, counselling: 253, 280–82, 284; Catholic:
301, 339 282; secular: 281–82
consciousness: xxxii Counter-Reformation: 268
consolation(s): 222, 239, 241, 243–44, courage: 307
299, 301, 311–12, 321, 324–25, 329, creation: xxxi, 115, 125, 139, 164, 175
337, 339 creativity: xxxi–xxxii, 126, 144
Constantinople: 98, 214 Creator, God as: xxix, xxxi, 122, 125,
contemplation: xiii–xiv, xxiii, xxvi, 129, 132, 146, 200, 276
xxx, xxxii–xxxv, l, lii, 18, 23, 27–29, creature(s): xxxi, 108–109, 115–16,
35, 39, 41, 52, 54–55, 57, 59, 62, 65, 123–24, 128–30, 133, 139, 141–43,
71, 73–74, 78–80, 86, 96, 101–102, 149, 159, 187, 198, 200, 207, 209,
105, 109, 111–13, 116–17, 119, 123, 218, 317
125, 135, 142, 146–49, 152, 160, 165, crises, spiritual: xvi, xviii, xxxv, 231,
177, 179, 183, 214–15, 217, 219, 291–332, 336, 341
Crosiers: 181 desert: 187, 264

cross: xxiv, 21, 51–52, 60, 68, 85, 174, desire(s): 82, 146, 151, 155, 159, 165–66,
240, 266, 276 179, 188–89, 192, 211, 237, 313, 315,
Cuadra, Pablo Antonio: xliv 323–24, 326, 330, 332, 335–36, 339
cults, mystery: 59, 67 desolation: 239
culture: 342; moral: 19; physical: 19; despair: 289, 330, 347
theology of: ix Des Places, Edouard: 262, 264
Cunningham, Lawrence S.: lvii, 134 Despres, Vincent: 73
Curé of Ars (St. John Vianney): 111 destitution: 291
Cyprian, St.: 46–47 destruction: 130
Cyril of Alexandria, St.: 66 detachment: xlvii, 103–104, 106, 246,
300–301, 316, 318, 320, 326
Daggy, Robert: xii, lvii development: intellectual: viii;
D’Ailly, Pierre: 86, 214–15 spiritual: viii, xxx, xxxiii, xxxvi,
Dalmais, Irénée: 56, 58–62 55, 73
damnation: xlix Deventer: 215
Daniélou, Jean, sj: viii, xxii, xxxix, 31, devil: 100, 107–108, 110–13, 170, 231,
71, 79–82, 92–95, 102 298, 300, 302–304, 321, 326
Dante: 36, 140, 148, 172 de Vinck, José: 151
darkness: 81, 96, 101, 113, 137, 142–43, Devotio Moderna: 215–16, 220, 222
150–52, 161, 163, 179, 181, 192, 209, devotion: 147, 153, 175, 183, 186, 216,
302, 306, 310, 319, 325, 327–30; 254, 273, 321, 333–34
divine: xxviii, 94–96, 144; luminous: diabolism: 170
xxvii, 180, 190, 242; mysticism of: Diadochos of Photice: 93
76, 78–79; shining: 95, 144; Dieker, Bernadette: xxx, 34
substantial: 330; way of: 151 Dionysians: xv, xxvi–xxviii, 93, 136,
David, King: 81 144–56, 160, 162, 168–69, 196, 206,
Davies, Oliver: xlv 214, 219
death: xxv, 48, 64, 189–90, 342, 344; Dionysius Exiguus: 73
ascetical: xxv, 48; mystical: xxv, 48, Dionysius, Pseudo-: xv, xxvii–xxx, 16,
79, 147; of love: 79, 180; to self: xxv, 30, 66–67, 74, 76, 93, 123–24, 136–
48, 64, 293; to world: 46, 71, 242 45, 147–51, 153–54, 168, 171, 178,
Déchanet, Jean, osb: 32–33, 73 180, 206, 215, 222, 228; works:
deification: 66, 198, 211–12 Celestial Hierarchy: 140, 147; Divine
dejados: 223 Names: xxviii, 137, 139, 143, 150;
Del Prete, Thomas: xlviii Ecclesiastical Hierarchy: 140–41;
delusion: xlvii, 135, 345 Hierarchies: xxviii, 137, 139–40, 143,
demons: 100, 104, 110–11, 114 149; Mystical Theology: xxviii, 16,
Denis the Carthusian: 222, 225 137, 143–44, 151, 153, 180; Symbolic
Denzinger, Heinrich: 183, 191, 202, Theology: 141, 143
204–205 Dionysus (Bacchus): 144
depression: 345 direction, spiritual: xvi–xix, xxxv, 42,
dereliction: 101 215, 233, 251–332; and therapy:
Index 399
280–94; bad: 312; good: 316; Earll, Mary Beth: lvii

history of: 254, 262–71; in mystical Eck, John: 210
crises: 294–332; necessity of: 272– Eckhart, Meister: ix, xvi, xxii,
74; types of: 256–62 xxvii, xliii–xlv, xlvii, 145, 153,
director, spiritual: ix, xxxiv, 15, 89, 195, 185–86, 191, 196, 198–208, 210–11,
230–32, 252, 255–62, 268–70, 284– 213–14, 217, 267; errors of: 203–
95, 299–302, 304–305, 307, 309, 205
312–15, 318, 320–21, 329; as father: ecstasy: xxix, 48, 56, 79, 81, 90, 121,
277; as guide: 278; as master: 276– 139, 142, 144, 147, 151, 158, 162–64,
77; as mediator: 276; as physician: 166–67, 170, 177, 179–80, 183, 192,
277–78; authority of: 274–75; 219, 239, 325
function of: 275–76; prudent: 316; Ecuador: 221
qualities of: 278–80 education, monastic: vii
discernment: 303; of spirits: 100–101, effort: 227, 321
215, 222–23, 270 Eichmann, Adolf: xl
disciple(s): 44, 148, 263, 265–66, 279, Elder, E. Rozanne: lvii
317 Elias: 127
discipline: 266, 277 Elias of Cortona: 175–76
discouragement: 21 emotions: 35, 109, 123, 343
discretion: 20, 199, 277, 280 emptiness: 318, 329–30
disquiet: 146 energy: xliv, 66, 327, 332
distraction(s): 109–10, 113, 119, 237–38, enlightenment: xxxii, 38, 85, 126, 180,
302, 311, 315 277, 298, 327
divinization: xv, xxiv, xxxiii, 38, 41, 51, environment: lii
53, 58–67, 142, 200, 206–207, 276, envy: 323
327, 332 epektasis: xxxiii, 82
docility: 257, 261, 264, 273, 275, 278, Ephrem, St.: 47–48
285 Epictetus: 264
doctrine(s): xxvi, xxviii, xl, 29, 68, 151, Epicurus: 263–64
192, 195, 203, 212; dangerous: 186; Epimenides: 58
esoteric: 57; mystical: 164; epiphany, divine: xxxi, 132–33, 164
mysticism and: xxiii, xxv epithumia: 111, 122
dogma: xxv, 66 Erasmianism: 221, 223
Dominic, St.: 193 Erasmus: 138, 223
Dominicans: xxxii, 26, 28, 55, 153, 155, eros: 141, 148
193, 195–96, 199, 220, 224, 235, eschatology: xlix, 130
267–68 esotericism: xl
doubt(s): 37, 309, 330, 344–46 espousal, spiritual: 155
dread: 231 essence: created: 124–25; divine: 70,
dryness: 323 76–77, 113, 119, 148, 161, 223;
dualism: 50 of the soul: 201
Dudon, Paul: 75 eternity: xxiv, xxxiii, 162, 191, 210
Durrwell, F. X., sj: 64–65 ethike: ix
eucharist: 38–39, 44, 47, 69, 131, 141, 83, 161, 239, 258; supernatural: 77,
174, 186, 208, 213, 223 295
Eudes, John, St.: 271 Ezechias (Hezekiah), King: 136
Eugene III, Pope: 196
Eunomians: 76–77 faculties: 155, 207, 209, 230, 243–44,
Eunomius: xxviii, 73, 76 247, 308, 311–12, 315, 318–20, 324,
Eunomos: xli 326–27, 330, 332
Eusebius of Caesarea: 130 failings: 309
Evagrius: xv, xxi–xxii, xxix–xxxi, xxxiv, faith: x, xxv, xlviii, 38, 46, 50, 52, 54, 57,
16, 31–32, 74, 94, 96–123, 128, 136, 59, 68, 77–78, 80–81, 86, 100–102,
138, 143, 154, 239, 265; works: 123, 147, 150, 177, 179, 212, 240,
Antirrhetikos: 111; De Oratione: xxii, 248, 261, 275–76, 285, 295, 299,
97–99, 104, 106–20; Kephalaia 300–302, 310, 319, 326; dogmatic:
Gnostica: xxii, 99–100, 105, 107, 36
110–12, 114–18, 120, 122, 128; Faricy, Robert, sj: xlv
Letter to Anatolios: 99; Letters: 117, fasting: 20, 47, 108, 176
120; Mirror of Monks: 99; On Father, God as: xxiii–xxiv, 39–41, 43, 45,
Thoughts: 117, 119; Praktikos: 99, 49, 51, 53–54, 59, 61–62, 69, 75–76,
108; Reflections: 117, 119; Selecta in 118, 126, 148, 151, 158, 198, 240, 265
Psalmos: 99, 117 Fathers: Apostolic: xiv, liii, 43–46;
Evdokimov, Paul: 34 Desert: xli, 16, 74, 154, 265–66, 268;
evil: 313, 321, 331, 338 Greek: xxix, 34, 70, 104–105, 124,
example: 278 162, 239; monastic: 246; of the
exemplarism: 200 Church: xxv, 16, 21, 27, 29, 36, 58,
exitus: 150 64–65, 67–68, 76, 124, 146, 294, 339;
experience: xxvi, xxviii, xlviii, 20, 36, spiritual: 260–61, 265, 271, 277, 306;
57, 67, 72, 84, 146, 159–60, 163, Western: 154
165–66, 171, 179, 196, 211, 231, faults: 233, 264, 278, 323
242–43, 245–46, 249–50, 260, 277, fear: 184, 241, 291, 324; of God: xl, 77,
279–80, 295–97, 302, 306, 309, 325– 100–102, 108, 196
26, 328, 336–38, 344; Christian: 77; Fedeli d’Amore: 181
contemplative: 167, 246; doctrine Fénelon, François: 52, 75, 217
and: xxvi; false: 77; feminine: 182; Ferdinand of Aragon: 221–22
mystical: xxxvi–xxxvii, 24, 56, 62, fervor: 308–11, 323
67, 72, 82–83, 91, 158, 170, 196, 250; fidelity: 189, 215, 257, 263, 275, 277
natural: 107–108; of divine flagellants: 173
presence: 94; of experience: 36; Flanders: 184, 213, 215, 267
of God: xxviii, 77, 83, 90, 110, 180; flesh: 46, 50, 53, 61, 71, 107, 109, 159–
of revelation: 36; of spirituality: 36; 60, 162, 166, 211, 213, 266, 337–38
paranormal: xxxvi; personal: 36, Florence, Council of: 214
65, 68; preternatural: 108; psycho- Florovsky, Georges: xxiii, 37–38
logical: 166; religious: xxxiii, 23–24, formation: ascetic: xx, 15; monastic: vii,
29–30; sense: 82–83; spiritual: 74, 266; spiritual: xxxiv, 261
Index 401
Fox, Abbot James, ocso: vii Gilbert of Hoyland: 149, 190, 332
Fox, Ruth, osb: li Gilby, Thomas, op: 55, 208
Fracheboud, André, ocso: 65, 148–49 Gilson, Étienne: 33, 64–65, 75, 147–48,
France: 172, 205, 226, 259, 270 190
Frances of Rome, St.: 194 Giroux, Robert: lvii
Francis de Sales, St.: 205, 270, 274 Glichheit: 202
Francis of Assisi, St.: xxv, xxxviii, 48, glory: xxxi, 38, 40, 42, 60, 63, 110, 122,
174–77, 179, 193 126, 130, 149, 204, 240, 327, 335
Franciscans: xiv–xv, 147, 149, 153, 155, gluttony, spiritual: 321
170, 172, 174–75, 183; Capuchin: gnosis: xxxi, 45, 47–59, 67, 78, 81, 101,
176, 210; Conventual: 176; 105, 112–13, 115, 118, 121–22, 125,
Observant: 176; spiritual: xxxviii, 129; multiform: 109–10, 114; of
173, 176, 219 intelligibles: 116; of the Trinity:
François de Sainte-Marie, ocd: 234 110, 117–18, 120
Frankenberg, W.: 99, 107 gnostic(s): xv, xl, 42, 49, 52, 66, 68, 112;
Frankfurt: 212 -pseudo: 49, 51
Frauenbewegung: 182 gnosticism: xli, 20; heretical: 49–51, 57;
freedom: xliv, 101, 103, 106, 172, 175, orthodox: 49
186, 223, 250, 262, 285, 297, 316, 318 gnostike: 100
Freud, Sigmund: 88, 284, 286 godhead: xliii, xlv, 45
Friend(s) of God: 171, 196–98, 211–12, Görres, Johann von: 25
214 gospel, eternal: 172
friendship: 277; with God: 227 grace: xxix, xxxiii, 19–21, 27, 41, 43, 72,
83, 89, 91, 110, 125–26, 135, 143, 151,
Gabriel of St. Mary Magdalen, ocd: 155–56, 159, 161, 163, 169, 177,
xxxiii, 236, 254–56, 274 179–80, 200, 211, 216–17, 223, 228–
Gallus, Thomas: xxvi, 149–52, 219 32, 237, 239, 243, 245, 250, 255,
Gandhi, Mohandas: 347 257–58, 260, 272, 275–77, 288, 298,
Garcia de Cisneros: 217, 222 300, 302–304, 306, 313, 318, 321,
Garrigou-Lagrange, Reginald, op: 28 325, 327, 333, 339; uncreated: 200
Gaul: 266 Granada: 221
Gay, Charles: 274 Granada, Luis de: 225–26, 269
gelassenheit: 197–98 Grayston, Donald: li
gemüt: 206–207 Greeks: 127
generosity: 21 Gregory Nazianzen, St.: 51, 66, 71–72,
gentleness: 192 98
Germany: 184, 216 Gregory of Nyssa, St.: xv, xxi–xxii,
Gerson, Jean: 153–54, 214–15, 217, 222, xxvii–xxix, xxxiii, xxxix, xli, 16–17,
228, 273 31–32, 71–82, 84, 90, 92–96, 98,
Gertrude the Great, St.: 149, 217 102, 121, 130–32, 143, 154–55, 163;
Gervase, Brother: 333 works: Contra Apollinarem: 73;
Gethsemani, Abbey of: viii, xi, xxxvi, Contra Eunomium: 73, 76; De
xlii, liii, lvii, 18 Hominis Opificio: 73; De Instituto
Christiano: 32, 72–73; De Virginitate: heart: xlix, 41, 80–81, 104, 147, 161,
92; De Vita Moysis: 75–76, 78–79, 179, 190, 227, 229–30, 277, 332–35,
95–96; In Cantica Canticorum: xxxix, 338–39
74, 80–82, 95, 102; In Hexaemeron: heaven: xxxix, 56, 62–63, 82, 164, 166–
131; In Laude Fratris Basilii: 79; 67, 172, 179, 229, 248, 297, 339–40
In Psalmos: 92 Helfta: 196
Gregory Palamas, St.: xiv, 34, 91–92 hell: xxxix, 190, 234, 299
Gregory the Great, St.: xxvii, 30, 84, Helms, Chad: 75
145, 148, 154, 168–71, 222, 228, 266 Henry of Halle: 196
grief: 324 Henry of Nordlingen: 198
Griesser, Bruno: 170 heresy: xlvii, 16, 49, 57, 76–77, 156,
Groote, Gerhard: 215–16 193, 203–204, 212, 217, 223–24
Grosseteste, Robert: 149 hermitage(s): xiii, xvi, xxxvii, xlv, 176
ground, of the soul: 201, 206 Hernandez, E.: 219
grund: 200, 206–207 Herp, Henry: 153–54, 217, 225
Guardini, Romano: 124–25 Hesnard, Angelo: 289
Guerric of Igny: 190 hesychasm: 16, 170
Guibert, Joseph de, sj: 20, 22–23, 33, hierarchy: 139–42, 150, 194, 260
184 Hildegard of Bingen, St.: 171, 196
guidance: 306 Hilduin: 138, 145
guide, spiritual: ix–x, 255–56, 272–73, Hilton, Walter: xlviii, 205–206, 242
305 Hippolytus, St.: 42, 59–60
Guigo I the Carthusian: xxxviii history: 123, 125–26
Guigo II the Carthusian: 332 holiness: 266, 278, 280, 285, 293
Guillaumont, Antoine: 99–100, 105, holokleros: 129, 133
107, 110–12, 114–120, 122, 128 Holy Spirit: xxiii–xxiv, xl, 19, 36, 38–
guilt: 112, 287, 289, 342, 344, 346 43, 49–50, 54, 62–63, 65–66, 69, 76,
Gullick, Etta: xii, xvii, xxxix, xliii–xlvi, 78–79, 82–83, 86, 91, 117, 120–21,
xlviii, lii, 199 158, 162, 172–74, 179, 193, 200,
Guy de Montrocher: 268 208, 211, 219, 228, 240, 254–55, 261,
265, 270, 276–77, 279, 285, 295,
310, 312–14, 320–21, 326–27, 338;
Hadewijch: xvi, xxii, xxxviii–xxxix, gifts of: 86, 208
182, 185–86, 188–90, 192, 196; Homer: 19
Deutero-: 185, 190–92 honesty: 133
Hallaj: xiv, 34 hope: xl, xlix, 54, 86, 101, 189, 249, 324,
Hammer, Victor: xix 330, 343, 345
Hannan, Jerome D.: 278 Hugh of Balma: 152, 154, 219, 222, 228
Harnack, Adolph von: 51 Hugh of St. Victor: 146–47, 172
Hart, Patrick, ocso: xxxi, xxxviii, lvii, Hugueny, E., op: 207
32, 259 humanism: xli, 220, 223, 332
Hausherr, Irénée, sj: 31–32, 97, 99, Humiliati: 181
106–20, 131, 262–63 humiliation: 209, 339
Index 403
humility: xlvii, 21, 46, 104, 111, 119, individuality: 252

132, 163–64, 174, 192, 194, 202, infidelity: 340
206, 209, 215–16, 227, 243, 255, infirmity: 328
261–62, 279–80, 289–90, 293, 299, Innocent XII, Pope: 75
300–303, 316, 321, 323, 325, 336 Inquisition: 156, 192, 203, 216, 220–25
humor: 347 insensibility: 104
inspiration: 135
Iamblichus: 140 institutionalism: 175
Ibora: 98 instruction: 278
iconoclasts: 66 integration: 293–94
Ida of Léau, Bl.: 184 integrity: 133, 344
Ida of Louvain, Bl.: 184–85 intellect: 35, 83, 89, 100, 118–19, 143–44,
Ida of Nivelles, Bl.: 184 151, 153, 156, 160, 175, 178, 181,
identity: xix, 344, 347 191, 201, 319, 329
idolatry: 142 intelligence: xxix, 78, 90, 94–95, 106,
Ignatius of Antioch, St.: xxiv, 43–47, 109, 116, 118–20, 123, 142–43, 159,
60, 67 178, 191, 238
Ignatius Loyola, St.: 217, 222–24, 268 intelligences: xxxi, 139, 141
ignorance: 101, 146, 179, 182, 327 intelligibles: 117–18, 122, 140, 143, 177,
illumination(s): ix, 47, 69, 78–79, 95–96, 179
109–10, 123, 129, 144, 177, 209, intuition: 180
240, 325, 327, 330; interior: 212 Irenaeus, St.: xxiii, 16, 49–52, 66
illuminism: 16, 50, 223–24, 260, 269, Isaac of Nineveh, St.: 74, 98
314 Isaac of Stella: 149, 171
illusion(s): 20–21, 37, 50, 92, 110–11, Isabella of Castile, Queen: 221–22
142, 252, 293, 299 Islam: xliii, 175, 221
image: divine: 59, 110, 128, 159, 171, isolation: 345
201, 208; of God: 51, 58, 75, 160,
207; of Trinity: 177
imagination: 111–12, 162, 178, 243, 300, Jacob: 340
308, 311–12 Jacopone da Todi: 185
immortality: xxiv, 60–62, 264 Jaeger, Werner: xxxix, 32, 72–73
impeccability: 102, 104 James, William: 17, 23–24, 30
imperfection(s): 321, 323, 327 Janowitz, Naomi: 140
impurity: 111, 328 jealousy: 280
incarnation: xxiv, 38, 40, 50–51, 59–60, Jeremiah: 330
127, 164, 179 Jerome, St.: 102, 157, 222
Incarnation, Convent of the, Avila: 233 Jerusalem: 136
incomprehensibility, divine: 76–78, 96 Jesuits: xiv, 17, 26, 210, 214–15, 217–19,
incorruptibility: xxiv, 50–51, 59 270, 273
Index: 225 Joachim of Flora: xxxviii, 172–73,
individualism: 23, 174, 216, 220, 253, 175–76, 219
343 Joan of Arc, St.: xlvii, 195
Job: 306, 328, 330 Kingdom: of Christ: 114–15; of God:

Joel: 41 102, 107, 131, 236, 255; of the
John Chrysostom, St.: 70–71, 76–78, Father: 115
108 knowledge: xxvi, 37, 56, 77, 80, 82, 90,
John Climacus, St.: 97, 222 112, 126, 130, 139, 146–47, 151, 161,
John Moschus: 97 168, 179, 190–92, 197, 207, 226, 231,
John of Salisbury: 145 240, 259, 285, 301, 305, 312–14,
John of the Cross, St.: ix, xiv, xviii, 317–19, 322, 324, 331, 336; divine:
xxii, xxv, xxvii, xxxv, 3, 17, 28, 30, 53; hidden: 57; intellectual: 78;
36–37, 48, 84, 93–96, 107–108, 112, loving: 84, 129; mystical: 152;
168, 186, 195, 219, 225, 229, 232–33, natural: 125; of Christ: 49; of God:
237–39, 279, 301–32, 337–38; xxviii, 40, 62, 77, 87, 94, 96, 105,
works: Ascent of Mount Carmel: 107, 132, 139; of truth: 101;
96, 112–13, 232, 301–303, 305–13, transcendent: 144
316, 320, 338; Dark Night: 238–39, Knowles, David, osb: xlvii
310, 316, 320–32, 338; Living Flame Koch, Hugo: 138
of Love: 279–80, 312–20; Spiritual Koran: 214
Canticle: 186–88 Kramer, Victor A.: xi, xxi, xxx, 34
John Paul II, Pope: 288 krasis: 107–108, 112
John Scotus Erigena: 64, 73–74, 137, Krynon, Jean: 154
145, 147, 200
John the Evangelist, St.: xv, xxiii, 16, labor(s): 103, 108, 146, 187, 279, 287,
18, 38–40, 43, 58, 176, 247, 250 305, 308–309, 315, 318, 324, 330;
Johnston, William, sj: xlviii manual: 20, 183, 236, 333
Joppa: 128 laity: 174, 181–82, 184, 193–95, 203,
Joppin, Gabriel: 75 225–26, 230, 232, 258, 260, 266–67,
Joseph of the Holy Spirit, ocd: 235–36 270
joy(s): xl, xliv, xlix, 21, 46, 63, 92, 96, Lamprecht von Regensburg: 185–86
107–108, 120, 159–60, 162, 198, 208, Lamy, T. J.: 47
240, 288, 324, 328–30, 334 Langland, William: xlvii
Judaism: xli, 42, 52, 127, 221, 225 Laredo, Bernardino de: 154, 226
judgement(s): 101, 115, 121–22, 126 Laughlin, James: xlii–xliii, li–lii
Julian of Norwich: xix, xxi, xlviii–l, lii law: 127–28, 140; canon: vii, 278;
Juliana of Mt. Cornillon, Bl.: 169 Church: 257; of God: 271; of love:
Jung, Carl Gustav: 107, 284, 293–94 226; of the Lord: 233
justice: lii, 102, 127, 179 Lax, Robert: xi, xlii
justification: 44 laziness: 310, 312
Justin Martyr, St.: 49 learning: 243, 260–61, 278, 280
Lebreton, Jules: 53, 56
Leclercq, Jean, osb: viii, 26, 32–33, 57,
Kelley, C. F.: xliv 63, 71
Kellia (Cells): 98 lectio divina: 222, 332
Kelly, J. N. D.: 76 Lemaitre, J.: 115, 129, 130–31, 136
Index 405
Lentfoehr, Thérèse, sds: xii, xvii isdom: 57, 126; spiritual: 86, 133,
w
Leo, Brother: 176 135, 330; supernatural: 20; way of:
Leo XIII, Pope: 254, 272–73 151
Leon, Luis de: 225 Lightfoot, J. B.: 45
letter, vs. spirit: 338 likeness: divine: xxxi, 128; of Christ:
levitation: 192 59, 175, 296; of God: 51, 58, 61, 63,
liberation: xxv, 48, 50–51, 65, 104, 198, 75, 159, 171
316, 323 Lima: 219
liberty: 80, 103–104, 210, 279, 285, 316, limitation(s): 309, 328
324 liturgy: xxv, 27, 39, 56, 63, 77, 92, 123,
Lidwyne of Schiedam, St.: 194–95 158, 174, 182, 216, 252–53, 277, 295,
life: active: xxxi, 21–22, 55–56, 100– 316
102, 108, 115, 122, 129, 187, 226; locus Dei: 113, 115–19, 121
affective: 291; angelic: 53, 101; locution(s): 28, 300–304; formal: 302–
ascetic: xx, 15, 22, 47, 50, 101, 108, 303; substantial: 302–303;
137, 279; contemplative: ix, xxvi, successive: 302
xxxi, li, 22, 28, 49, 55–56, 100–101, logikos: 132
105, 115, 120–22, 135, 158, 172, 187, logoi: xxx–xxxii, 108, 114–16, 121–35
208, 246, 263, 265, 292, 320; divine: Logos: xxiv, 51, 115, 131
xxv–xxvi, xxxiii, 51, 61, 66; eternal: Longpré, E., ofm: 177–78, 180–81
40, 167; everlasting: 38; gnostic: Lossky, Vladimir: xxv, xliv, 34, 51, 66
101; in the Spirit: xl, 120; intellec- Louf, André, ocso: xxxviii
tual: 152; interior: 211–12, 225, 256, Louis de Blois: 210
312, 332; mixed: 55; monastic: 103, Louis XIV, King: 75
106, 236, 287, 292, 294; moral: 159; Louismet, Savinien, osb: 27
mystical: xxi, 15, 42, 78, 159, 228, Louisville: vii, liii, lvii
250, 295–97, 304, 320, 323; love: xxvi, xlvii, l, 21, 38, 40–41, 43,
penitential: ix; religious: 182, 290; 55, 59, 79–82, 87, 90, 94, 100–101,
risen: 295; sacramental: 49; 104–105, 107, 111, 113, 115–17, 119,
spiritual: viii, xxxii, xxxv, 20, 22, 121–22, 124, 126–28, 139, 142, 146–
55–56, 152, 156, 159, 181, 208–209, 47, 151–53, 158–61, 164–66, 171–
220, 233, 257, 274, 291, 304, 307, 72, 174–75, 180, 182, 186, 188–90,
310, 320–23, 333 192, 202, 207, 218, 226–30, 237,
Lifton, Robert Jay: xix, liv, 340–47 275, 285, 290–91, 296, 311, 318–19,
ligature: 87 328–29, 332, 337; contemplative:
light: xl, 38, 53, 56, 71, 77–79, 95–96, 331; cosmic: 154; courtly: 147;
112, 118–19, 125, 143, 149, 151, 160– divine: xxxiii, 141, 146, 326–27;
61, 163, 168, 179–80, 192, 200, 212, ecstatic: xxix, 139, 143; for God:
276, 309–10, 329, 335; divine: 54, 107, 187; infused: 219, 319;
82, 165, 327, 329–31; incorporeal: mystical: 118, 152, 211; of enemies:
69; infused: 310; mysticism of: 30; 240; of God: 239, 245, 273; of world:
natural: 211, 326, 330; of God: 110, 147; pure: 64, 75, 88, 114, 143, 160,
117, 128, 317; of faith: 96; of 186–87, 331; wound of: 331
Low Countries: 184, 216 McCann, Justin, osb: 3, 84, 277

loyalty: 277, 344–45 McCormick, Anne: lvii
Luce, Clare Boothe: xlix McGinn, Bernard: viii, 146
Ludolph the Carthusian: 222 Meade, Mark: lvii
Lull, Ramon: 221 Mechtilde of Hackbourn: 222
Lutgarde of Aywières, St.: 184 Mechtilde of Magdeburg: 185, 196–97,
Luther, Martin: 156, 210, 212–14 217
Lutherans: 234 meditation: 19, 87, 108, 115, 152, 159,
Lyons: 49 197, 208, 211, 213, 215–18, 222, 226,
229, 233, 236, 241, 243, 246, 264,
Macarius, Pseudo-: xv, 16, 32, 73–74 269, 302, 308–11, 314–15, 317, 320,
Macarius the Great, St.: 32, 98 324, 332–36, 339, 342; affective: 310;
MacAvoy, Joseph: 287, 289, 293 discursive: 237, 308, 310
Macedonians: 66 meekness: 192, 227, 323
Madeleva, Sr., csc: xix, xxi, xlix–l, lii melancholy: 303, 307, 310–12
Malet, André, ocso: 288 Melania the Elder, St.: 98, 102
Maloney, George, sj: 73 Melchizedek: 63, 70
Manichaeans: 156–57 memoria: 125, 159
Mao Tse-Tung: 341 memory: 35–36, 107, 125, 146, 148, 160,
Maréchal, Joseph, sj: 186 308, 313, 327, 329, 337
Maritain, Jacques: l, 250–51, 258 mendicants: 172, 183, 195–96, 220, 267
Maritain, Raïssa: l, 258 Mercurian, Everard, sj: 217
Marmion, Columba, osb: 274 mercy: xlvii, 52, 121–22, 126, 142, 182,
marriage: mystical: 64, 239, 295; 192, 242, 288, 318, 328–29
spiritual: 22, 240 Merswin, Rulman: 198
martyr(s): xv, xxv, 42–48, 64 Merton, Thomas: as hermit: xlvii; as
martyrdom: xxiv, 42–48, 52 master of scholastics: vii; as novice
Mary, Blessed Virgin: 174, 182–83, 186, master: vii, xi, xxxvi; as spiritual
208 guide: ix–x; social conscience of:
Mary Magdalene, St.: 187 lii; works: “Art and Worship”:
Mason, Herbert: xi, xiv 134; Ascent to Truth: xxix, xxxiii;
Massignon, Louis: 34–35 Breakthrough to Peace: li–lii; Cassian
master of students: xx, 15 and the Fathers: viii, xv, xxi, xxxvi,
materialism: 133 32, 52, 82, 99, 103, 207–208, 236;
matter: 50, 100 “Cistercian Fathers and Monastic
maturity, spiritual: 293, 295, 304, 323 Theology”: 18, 171; “Cistercian
Maximus the Confessor, St.: xxii, xxx– Order . . . to the Reform of
xxxi, xxxiv, 31–32, 64, 66, 75, 97, Benedict XII”: 171; Clement of
99, 121, 123–24, 126–29, 131–32, Alexandria: xlii–xliii, li–lii; Cold War
135–36, 145, 155; works: Ambigua: Letters: lii; Collected Poems: xlii, xlv;
123–24, 127, 132; Mystagogia: 124; Conjectures of a Guilty Bystander:
Questiones ad Thalassium: 128–29, xxxix, xli, xliv, xlvii, xlix; Courage
131–32, 135–36 for Truth: xliii–xliv, l, 251; “Father
Index 407
Joseph Cassant, ocso”: 288; “Feast Moingt, Joseph: 53–54

of Freedom”: 266; Figures for an Molinos, Miguel de: 183
Apocalypse: l; Hidden Ground of Love: Mombaer, Johann: 222
xii, xvii, xx, xxix, xxxix–xli, xliii– monastery: vii, 35, 37, 105, 134, 199,
xliv, xlvi–xlviii, lii, 33, 88, 199; 205, 278, 288–89, 291–92
Inner Experience: xxix, l–li, 251; monasticism: xxxiv–xxxv, 3, 15, 141,
“Introduction to Cistercian Theo- 154, 260–62, 264; Egyptian: 96;
logy”: 18; Learning to Love: xlv; medieval: 100, 266; oriental: 264–
Literary Essays: xxxi, l–li; Monastic 66
Journey: xxxviii; Mystics and Zen Monica, St.: 164, 167
Masters: xlvii–xlviii; New Seeds of monk(s): vii, xiii, liii, 47–48, 119–21,
Contemplation: viii–ix, li, 55–56; 140–41, 155, 197, 215, 222, 262,
No Man Is an Island: viii; Pre- 265–66, 278, 293, 340
Benedictine Monasticism: viii; Road monophysites: 66, 136, 139
to Joy: xii, xvi–xvii; “Sanctity in monothelites: 66
the Epistles of St. Paul”: 40; School Monserrate, Abbey of: 222
of Charity: vii, xxxviii, 258–59; Montaldo, Jonathan: xxx, 34
Search for Solitude: 134, 206; Seeds of Montanism: 156
Contemplation: li, 55; Seven Storey morality: 23, 215–16, 220, 281, 346
Mountain: 54–55; Solitary Life: mortification: 55, 104–105, 231, 233,
xxxviii; Survival or Prophecy?: 32; 302, 315, 320–21, 324
Thomas Merton and James Laughlin: Moses: 52, 78, 80, 113, 127, 143–44
Selected Letters: xlii–xliii; Thoughts Moses, Abbot: 236
in Solitude: viii; Turning Toward the Mount Carmel: 234
World: xi–xiii, xv–xviii, xxxviii–xliv, mourning: 315
xlvi–xlix, li–lii, 34–35, 65, 91, 171, movements: heretical: 173; heterodox:
258; What Is Contemplation?: l–li, 173
251; When Prophecy Still Had a Voice: Mumford, Lewis: 134
xi, xlii; Witness to Freedom: xi, xiv, Musurillo, Herbert, sj: xxxix
xix, xxi, xlix–l, lii, liv, 35; Zen and mysteries: xxv, l, 50, 52, 63, 65, 130,
the Birds of Appetite: 208 180; Christian: 58, 78, 146, 253;
Messalianism: 32 liturgical: 77–78, 295
Meyendorff, John: 34, 91–92 mystery, divine: xxvii, l, 38, 66, 130,
Middle Ages: xxvi, xxviii, xxx, xxxiv, 265
xxxviii, xliv, 106, 136–37, 144, 148, Mystical Body: 41, 62, 158, 166
151, 154, 168–70, 172, 174, 183, 193, mysticism: viii, xiii, xv, xxvi, xxxii–
219, 253, 267–68 xxxiii, lii, 3–4, 18, 20–23, 28, 36, 38,
Migne, J.-P.: xxix, 35, 50, 137 58, 72, 80, 142, 148, 157, 175, 183,
Milan: 157–58 207, 225; active: 251; apophatic:
mind: 52, 108–109, 114, 120, 144, 151, xxxvi, 76, 82, 84, 86, 156; being:
178–79, 311, 317, 332, 334, 340 155; biblical: 171; bridal: 86, 155,
misery: 312, 323, 329 182, 185; Byzantine: xiv, 3, 75, 123;
moderation: 176 cataphatic: 155, 163; Catholic: 25;
Christian: viii–ix, xxiv, xxxvii, 27, divine: 56, 58–59, 61–62, 96;
31, 38, 41–42, 48, 51, 67, 76, 106, 154; human: 59, 66
diabolical: 25; divine: 25; Eastern: Nautin, Pierre: 42
30; erotic: 155; false: 16, 50, 172, Nazis: 341
289; Flemish: 181; fourteenth- negation: mere: 317; path of: 228;
century: xv, 181–220; heretical: 170, pure: 317
195, 221; heterodox: 172; Jewish: negligence: 310
140; Latin: 170; medieval: 3; neo-Platonism: xli, 58, 120, 136, 138–
monastic: 171; non-Christian: xiv, 40, 162, 168, 200, 206, 223
18, 29, 34; of darkness: 76, 94, 168; Nestorians: 66
of light: xxvii, 30, 94, 168; of night: Netherlands: 184, 205
30, 75–76, 94; of poverty: 174; neurasthenia: 310
ontological: 156; oriental: xxvii, 33; neurosis: 35–36, 282–83, 285–86, 290,
Orthodox: xxvii, 18, 33–34, 75–76; 303
orthodox: 170, 193, 221; popular: New Catholic Encyclopedia: xvii–xviii,
170, 181, 183, 185, 192–93, 197, 215; xxxv
pseudo-: 183; Rhenish: 221; sacra- Newman, J. H.: l
mental: 38–39; Spanish: 221–51; Nicholas of Cusa: 214
speculative: 156, 214–15, 220, 268; Nicholas of Flue, St.: xlvii
subjective: 158, 163; theology and: Nietzsche, Friedrich: 144
xiv–xv, 38, 65–66, 149, 219–20; night: active: 304; dark: xiv, xxv, 48,
Trinitarian: 39, 51; Western: xv, 84, 195, 301, 304–306, 310, 312,
xxvii, xxxiv, 19, 30, 86, 93, 137, 320, 323, 326–30, 332; divine: 80;
144–45, 154–81 mystical: 80; mysticism of: xxvii,
mystics: 23–24, 29, 267; apophatic: 95; 30, 74–76, 94; of sense: xxxv, 87,
Byzantine: 119; Carmelite: 154, 238, 304, 307–308, 311, 320, 322–25,
307; Eastern: 163; English: xix, xxi, 337; of spirit: xxxv, 87, 304, 320,
xlvii–l, 153, 172, 174, 205; false: 215, 322, 324–26; passive: 304
270; Flemish: 172, 191, 196, 214, Nilus, St.: 99, 106
245; fourteenth-century: xvii, xxi, noble level: 201
xlvii–xlviii, 153; German: xvii, 172, nominalism: 220
195–220; heterodox: 194; medieval: nomos: 127
158, 232; of darkness: 94–95; of non-violence: lii, 347
light: 94; orthodox: 194, 213; nous: 106, 111, 122
Rhenish: xiv–xvi, xxxviii, xliii–xliv, novice(s): vii, xi, xli, 233, 262, 264–65,
17, 86, 145, 153–55, 174, 188, 191, 267
196, 198–99, 205, 213–14, 217, 223, novice mistress: 233, 256, 269
232, 245–46; Spanish: 36–37, 205; novitiate: 15, 237, 263, 286, 342
Western: 30, 150 Noye, Irénée: 273
narcissism: 23, 88 obedience: xlvii, 20, 51, 53, 106, 174–

nature: xxxii, 116, 122–23, 127, 132, 135, 75, 177, 202, 223, 257, 261–62, 266,
159, 163, 179, 200, 216, 223, 228; 273–75, 299, 342
Index 409
Obrecht, Edmond, ocso: xvii patience: 20, 101, 109, 111, 192, 209,
obsession: 283, 291 211, 228, 322
O’Callaghan, Tommie: lvii Patristic era: xxvi, xxxiii–xxxiv, 106
Ocampo, Maria de: 234–35 Paul, St.: xxi, 38, 40–41, 44, 51, 58,
occultism: 23 77, 136, 138–39, 157, 165, 242,
O’Connell, Patrick: vii–viii, xv, l, 32 279
Oechslin, Raphael-Louis: 200–203, 205 peace: xl, xlviii–xlix, 21, 103–106, 197,
office, divine: 236 230, 240, 264, 294, 309, 311, 314,
Olier, Jean-Jacques: 270–71 318, 322–23, 330, 338
Olphe-Galliard, Michel, sj: 83, 86, 89– Pearson, Paul M.: lvii
91, 218, 263, 269, 273 Peers, E. Allison: 84, 112–13, 188, 225–
O’Meara, Thomas, op: xlv 32, 237, 249, 280
oratio: 332, 336–37 Pelagianism: 20, 101–103, 156
ordination: vii, 293 Pelikan, Jaroslav: 66
O’Reilly, Terence: 224 penance(s): 48, 176, 233, 271–72, 291
Origen: ix, xv, xxi, xli, 16, 47, 58–60, Pennington, M. Basil, ocso: xxx
68–72, 82, 84, 92–94, 97–98, 100, Pentecost: 41
102, 124, 140, 154–55, 157 perfection: 20, 22, 27–28, 52, 55–57, 59,
Origenism: 74, 83, 96–98, 102, 123, 136, 105, 142, 159, 177, 194, 215, 219,
154–55 223, 230, 235–36, 249, 254–55, 269,
orthodoxy: 269 272, 275, 296, 304, 315, 318, 325,
Orwell, George: 341 330; ascetic: xxxii, 22; Christian:
Ostia: 164, 166 xxxii, 19, 22, 45, 250; integral: 250,
Osuna, Francisco de: 154, 205, 223, 296; substantial: 250, 295
225–32, 273 persecution: 40
ousia: 79 personalism: 23
Peru: 219
Paguio, Erlinda: xlv pessimism: 157, 159
Palestine: xli Peter, St.: 39, 41, 44, 128
Palladius: 103 Peter of Alcántara, St.: 226
pantheism: 58, 65, 147, 204, 212–15 Petry, Ray C.: 147
papacy: 193 philautia: 131
paradise: xl, xlv, 81, 91–92, 100, 125, Philip, St.: 151
148, 163, 174 Philippe, Paul, op: 150, 152–53
Paris: 136, 138, 145, 199, 214, 226, 271 Philo: xli, 76, 81
paschal journey: xxiv, xlv, 293 philosophy: xlii, 49, 52, 58–59, 141, 146,
passion(s): 22, 53, 78, 100–104, 106, 155, 180, 263–64, 328, 331
108–109, 115, 123, 134, 142, 165, phusis: 127
182, 213, 265, 279, 285, 324, 326, piety: 158, 174, 182–83, 192, 209, 216,
345 219–20, 253, 321
passivity: 151, 179, 186, 207–209, 211, pity: 109, 288, 313, 328
213, 217, 223, 237–39, 243, 281, 293, Pius XII, Pope: 255
302, 308, 310, 312, 320, 322, 331 Plato: 35, 52, 58, 111, 124
Platonism: 53, 59, 71–72, 76, 100, 120, union: 239, 248, 250, 295, 325;
125, 167 ordinary: 307, 310; passive: 308,
Plazaola, Juan: 224 310, 312–13; public: 316; pure: 100,
pleroma: 51 110, 118; simple: 136; supernatural:
Plotinus: 58, 157 241, 245, 247
Polycarp, St.: 46 preaching: 187
Ponte, Luis de: 273 presence: 46; of God: ix, 110, 244
Porete, Marguerite: xlv–xlvii, 183–85 presumption: 280, 325
Porion, J.-B.: xvi, xxxviii–xxxix, 155, Previté-Orton, C. W.: 3
182, 184–86, 188–92, 194–95 pride: 111, 243, 280, 321, 325
Portinari, Beatrice: 36 priest(s): vii, xi–xiii, 3, 140–41, 164, 194,
Poulain, Augustin, sj: xiv, xxxiii, 17, 198, 255–56, 260, 267, 269, 274–76,
25, 27–29, 38, 86–92, 94, 219, 238 282, 286, 293, 343, 346
Pourrat, Pierre: 75, 173, 204–206, 224, priesthood: vii, xx, xxxv, 15, 63, 215,
226, 238 275
poverty: lii, 174–77, 186, 195–96, 208, Proclus: 138, 140
226, 249, 288, 293; interior: 195, profession, monastic: 105, 141
202–203, 209, 242; of spirit: 204– progress: 343, 346; spiritual: 233, 237,
205, 226, 317, 326 258, 275, 305–306, 318–19, 321
power(s): xlvii, 21, 40, 43, 52, 107, 156, prophecy: 103, 171–72, 193, 196, 220
177, 179–81, 188, 193, 207, 229, 231, prophet(s): 157, 173, 175, 325
240, 261, 314, 328, 330 Protestantism: 173, 196, 199, 220
praise: 160, 230–31, 321 providence: 62, 114, 121, 126, 176,
praktike: xxx, 100, 102 275–76, 293, 299
praxis: 100, 129 prudence: 233, 262, 280, 285, 300
prayer: xlvii, 19, 37, 44, 57, 101, 104, psalmody: 108–109
106–20, 151–52, 159, 164, 178, 184, psychiatry: 252–53, 257, 282–83, 286,
187, 189, 211, 229–30, 232–34, 236, 290, 343
243, 257, 261, 265, 273, 277–79, 285, psychoanalysis: 253, 283–84, 286
290, 296, 302–304, 309, 314, 316, psychology: xxxvii, xlvii, 27, 30, 89–90,
323, 329, 332–34, 336–37, 339; 146, 158, 163, 206–207, 246, 280–82,
active: 317; affective: 219, 308; 284–88, 290–91, 340, 343, 347
apophatic: 87; contemplative: 215, psychosis: 284, 298, 300, 303, 345
229, 245, 308, 312; discursive: 110, psychotherapy: 280, 282–83
307–308; infused: 317; interior: purgation: 78, 177, 222, 316, 322–23,
223, 227, 229; meditative: 109, 246; 326–27, 330–31, 342
mental: 223, 227, 233, 236, 269; purgatory: 195, 329
mystical: 25, 86–88, 227, 245–46, purification: ix, xxxii, 40, 47, 53, 55–56,
248–50, 307, 313, 325; of petition: 58, 93, 101, 103–106, 115–16, 119,
106, 204; of quiet: 22, 86, 238, 241, 122, 126, 128, 132, 135, 140–42, 165,
244–48, 295, 300; of recollection: 179, 208–209, 227, 231, 238–39, 276,
238, 241–48, 295; of simple regard: 295–96, 304, 312, 320–21, 324–25,
218, 238; of simplicity: 218, 238; of 327, 329, 332
Index 411
purity: 81, 91, 101, 107, 119, 122, 133, Reformation: xxvi
141, 194, 313, 326–28, 334; ascetic: regression: 344
92; of faith: xlvii, 301; of heart: 81, regret: 314
103, 105–107, 115, 165, 179, 236, Reinhardt, Ad: ix
334–35; of intellect: 117; of love: religion(s): 23; false: 35; mystery: 67
65, 160, 186 Renaissance: 137–38
Pythagoras: 263 Renty, Gaston de: 270
renunciation: 19–20, 104, 202
quiet: 106, 308, 312, 314–15, 318, 324; repose: 87, 308–309
interior: 309 respect: 107, 277
quietism: xv, 17, 103, 213, 215, 223, ressourcement: viii
230, 269, 317; semi-: xiv, 17 rest: 159–60, 309, 311, 315–16, 324, 338
quietness: 311, 318, 322 restlessness: 146
quietude: 103 restoration, cosmic: 101
resurrection: 38, 42–44, 50, 58–59, 63–
race: lii 64, 71, 100, 174, 276, 293
Rachel: 147–48, 340 revelation(s): xxiii, xxvi, xlix, 24, 28,
Rahner, Karl, sj: 89, 183, 191, 202, 204 36, 50, 52, 65, 68, 76, 115, 123–24,
rapture(s): 28, 181, 186, 225, 239, 241, 127, 159, 169, 181, 192, 211
289, 300 reverence: 107
raptus: 150, 163 Rhineland: 184, 197, 212–13, 215, 220,
Rayez, André: 263, 267–68, 273 267
reading: 108, 151, 290, 332–34, 339 Richard of St. Victor: 56–57, 147–48,
reason: 147–49, 178, 191, 211, 308–309, 228
334 Rochais, H. M.: 33
reasoning: 106, 110, 148, 152, 179, 185, Rocques, René: 67, 115, 138–41
237, 302; discursive: 244, 314; Rolland, Romain: 88
imaginative: 314 Rome, Imperial: 341
rebirth: 38, 342, 344 Rousseau, Douanier: xxx, 134–35
recapitulation: 50–52, 58, 68, 100, 128 Rousseau, Marie: 270–71
recluses, English: xlvii Rufinus: 98, 102–103
reclusion: 183 Rule of St. Albert: 233–34, 248
recogidos: 223 Rule of St. Benedict: xxiii, 3, 16, 84, 262,
recogimento: 228 277–78
recollection: 106, 115, 218, 226, 228–32, Ruysbroeck, John: xxi, xxvii, xxxviii,
237–38, 241, 243, 245–48, 273, 302, xliii, xlvii, 30, 86, 153–54, 185, 188,
312, 315, 318 190, 196, 199, 205, 210, 213–15, 217
reconciliation: 294
reconstruction: 343
redeemer, God as: xxxi, 122, 276 sacrament(s): xxv, xlvii, 38, 42, 46, 49,
redemption: l, 51, 60, 62, 179, 194 71, 85, 131, 140–42, 146, 156, 158,
reditus: 150 177, 194, 201, 208, 213, 223, 227,
reflection: xxix, 143, 163, 302 253, 255, 271–72, 285, 293, 295, 322
sacramentality: xxxii self-examination: 288, 343

sacrifice(s): 21, 43, 47, 63, 69, 105, 136, self-expression: 346
182, 227, 290, 293–94, 304 self-forgetfulness: 20, 23, 65, 240
St. Denis, Abbey of: 138 self-knowledge: 57, 242
St. John, Donald: xxx self-love: 111, 131, 208
St. Joseph’s Convent, Avila: 233–34 self-renunciation: 21
St. Mary’s College: xix, xli self-reproach: 312
Salamanca, University of: 221 self-sacrifice: 186, 194
salvation: 54, 61, 63, 66, 68, 115, 120, self-stripping: 208, 212
130–31, 159, 163, 175, 186, 276 self-surrender: 29
sanctification: 39, 41, 179 self-will: 208
sanctity: 20–21, 39, 184, 195, 254–55, seminarians: 255, 270
284, 288, 325 Seneca: 264
Sarrazin, John: 143–45 sense(s): xxix, 83–84, 100, 107, 112, 120,
Saudreau, Auguste: xiv, xxxii, 17, 25, 123–24, 127, 135–36, 143, 148, 160,
27–28 162–63, 167, 178, 211, 238, 242, 248,
Savonarola, Girolamo: 268–69 304, 308, 311, 313–16, 318, 322,
Scala Claustralium: xviii–xix, xxii, liii, 324–25, 332; bodily: xxxvi–xxxvii,
332–40 82–83, 91, 316; carnal: 92; exterior:
Scaramelli, Giovanni, sj: 24 82–83, 88; interior: xxxvi, 83, 87–88;
Scete: 97–98 spiritual: xiii, xv–xvi, xxxiv,
Schlesinger, Bruno: xx, xli, lii xxxvi–xxxvii, 58, 82–96, 132, 180,
science: 17, 52, 130–31, 178, 219, 277; 214, 316, 335; spiritualized: 91
of contemplation: 169 sensuality: 326
scintilla animae: 90, 153, 200 servant, suffering: 335
Scripture: xxiv, 18, 42, 50, 52, 54, 58, service: 39, 187, 303
63, 68, 72, 74, 111, 115, 122–23, 126, Severus of Antioch: 66
129–32, 157, 171, 265, 328, 334–36 sexuality: 280, 284, 292
scruples: 268, 309 Shakers: ix, xxx, xl, 133–34
Scupoli, Lorenzo: 269 Shannon, William: xi–xii, xxix, li–lii,
self: xxiv–xxv, xxix, xlvii, 48, 122, 164, 33, 35, 251
292–94 Sheed, Frank: liv, 64
self-abnegation: 198 silence: 37, 45–46, 55, 90, 103, 143–44,
self-absorption: 211 146, 151, 162, 180–81, 191, 207,
self-accusation: 346 231, 234, 236, 241, 246, 248, 302,
self-awareness: 23 308, 317, 319
self-betrayal: 344 simplicity: xl, xlvii, 65, 127–28, 133,
self-commitment: 341 184, 186, 190, 216, 232, 302, 340
self-complacency: 325 sin: 37, 46, 51, 61, 100, 104, 123, 130–31,
self-consciousness: 23 146, 159, 179, 201, 204, 213, 236,
self-denial: xxiv, 317, 321 265, 267, 272, 275, 284, 287, 307,
self-discipline: 19, 101, 264 310, 312, 321, 323, 327; capital: 321;
self-emptying: 186 original: 91, 177, 179
Index 413
sincerity: 133 Staats, Reinhart: 73

Singleton, Charles: 36, 148, 172 stability: 289
sinners: 186, 194 Stace, W. T.: 24
sloth: 114, 323 Stephen, St.: 42
sociology: 280, 282 Stephen of Salley (Sawley): 218
Socrates: 52, 263 Stewart, Columba, osb: 32
solitude: 55, 108, 175, 234, 246, 311–12, Stiglmayr, J.: 138
315–16, 318, 333 stigmata: xxv, 48, 86, 176, 192
Son of God: xxiii–xxiv, 39–40, 45, 51, Stoicism: 103, 264
53–54, 62, 69, 76, 78, 158, 200, 202, Stolz, Anselm, osb: xxxvi, 29, 91–93
204, 317 Strange, Joseph: 170
sonship, divine: 51, 61, 65, 202 Strasbourg: 199
sorrow(s): 190, 198, 314, 330 strength: 188, 332, 338
soteriology: xxiv, 130 struggle: 342
soul(s): 21, 23, 28, 37, 53, 55–56, 63–64, study: 107, 149, 151–52, 157, 175, 180,
81, 91, 103, 105, 112–13, 156, 160– 333
62, 165, 177, 179, 183, 186–87, 190– Suarez, Francisco, sj: 219
91, 194, 200–201, 204, 209, 211, 227, Suavet, Thomas, op: 271
229–31, 238–40, 242–43, 247, 249– subjectivism: 343
50, 252–53, 255, 257, 260–61, 264, submission: 101, 322, 333, 343
267, 270, 272, 276–77, 279, 295–99, suffering(s): 46, 64, 87, 101, 135–36,
301–303, 305–307, 309–10, 312–14, 151, 174, 176, 182, 189–90, 195, 198,
316, 318–19, 321, 324, 326–32, 336– 202, 209, 211, 240, 264, 266, 287,
38; spark of: xliv–xlv, 200; summit 295–96, 306, 309, 311–13, 327–28,
of: 153, 207 336, 345
Spain: 154, 205, 226, 232, 270 Sufism: xiv
speculation: 147, 153, 156–57, 178, superstition: 260
211, 230, 263; apophatic: 81 Surin, John Joseph, sj: 219
Spender, Natasha: xlvii surrender: 317–18
spirit: 50, 91–92, 96, 101, 103, 109, 118, Suso, Henry: 196–99, 206, 210–11,
122, 127, 131, 133, 135–36, 142–43, 213–14, 217, 222
149, 162, 180, 186, 189, 218, 228–29, Suzuki, D. T.: 33, 199, 208
239, 243, 260, 285, 303–304, 315–16, symbolism: xxviii–xxix, 43, 121, 132,
318, 322, 332, 338 134, 142, 347
spiritualism: 23 synderesis: 90
spirituality: xxiii, xxx, 16, 25, 27, 33, synergy: xxxii, 123
155, 175, 183, 186, 227, 233, 252, Syria: 43–44, 48–49, 74, 98, 139
254, 257, 279, 281, 291; active: 313;
Béguine: xv; Byzantine: xxx;
Catholic: 26, 215, 252; Christian: Tagaste: 158
xx; medieval: 332; mystical: 154; Talbot, C. H.: 33, 218
monastic: 171 Tanner, J. R.: 3
Squire, Aelred, op: 218 Tanquerey, Adolphe: viii, 22, 238
Tauler, John: xvi, xxii, xxvii, xliii, 33, 35, 45, 94, 118, 121, 136, 142,
xlvii, 30, 153, 196, 198–99, 205–11, 149–50, 155, 169, 177–79, 228, 243,
213–14, 217, 225 327; mysticism and: xxiii, xxvi, 16,
tawhid: xliii 65, 149; negative: xxviii; pastoral:
technology: 130–31 xi, xiii, xxxiv–xxxv, 3, 255; patristic:
Teilhard de Chardin, Pierre, sj: 130–31 xxiv; positive: xxviii; sacramental:
temperament: 107, 307 xxviii, 137; scholastic: xxviii, 136–
temptation(s): 37, 100–101, 104, 110– 37, 150, 152, 219; scientific: xxvi,
12, 136, 146, 277–78, 290, 306, 309, xxx, 137, 169; speculative: 58, 152,
323–24 177, 199, 228; spiritual: xxviii, 22,
tenderness: 319, 328 33, 35; spirituality and: 36;
tepidity: 310, 312 symbolic: xxviii–xxix, 137, 177–79;
Teresa of Avila, St.: xiv, xvi–xvii, xxii, systematic: x, xxvi; technical: 220
xxvii, xxxiii, xxxv, xlix, 17, 36–37, theoria: ix, 54, 69, 74, 80, 265; mystike:
94, 218, 221–22, 225–29, 232–50, 67, 69, 74; physike: ix, xv, xxix–xxxiii,
270, 273, 295–301, 303–304, 311–12; 78, 100, 114–15, 117, 121–37, 140,
works: Constitutions: 233; 142, 164, 167
Foundations: 237; Interior Castle: 94, theosis: xxvi, xxxiii, 58, 66
227, 229, 234, 237–45, 249, 295–301, theosophy: 23
303, 311; Life: 234–35, 237, 243–44, Thérèse of Lisieux, St.: 37, 189, 205
297; Way of Perfection: 234, 246–48, Théry, G., op: 207–208, 210
273 Thomas à Kempis: 216
Tertullian: 46, 156 Thomas Aquinas, St.: x, 28, 54–56,
thanksgiving: 47 103, 140, 149–50, 153, 172, 208, 232
thearchy: 141–42 Thomas Merton Center: vii, liii, lvii,
Theatines: 269 18
theognosis: 67, 69 Thomas of Jesus, ocd: 236
theologia: ix, xxx, 81, 115, 121–22, 125, thought(s): 244, 301, 322; simple: 115–
239, 265 16
Theologia Germanica: xxxix, 198, 212, thought reform: 340–47
214 thumos: 111, 122
theologian(s): 107, 260; medieval: Toledo: 226
xxxiii; mystical: 137; patristic: torment: 327, 329
xxxiii; speculative: 196 torpor: 311–12
theology: xxvi, 16, 36–39, 65, 110, 117, Torquemada, Tomas: 221
146, 155, 159, 169, 180; apophatic: torture: 341
xxviii–xxix, 93, 139, 142, 151, 168, totalism: 340
219; ascetical: viii, xx–xxi, 15, 19, Toulouse: 226, 288
22, 33; cataphatic: xxviii–xxix, 139, tradition: 35–36, 260, 347; apophatic:
142, 151, 168; contemplative: x; xxviii, xxxvi, 17, 93; ascetic: 105,
discursive: xxviii, 142; dogmatic: 278; Benedictine: xxxiv, 154;
xxiv, 60; monastic: 57–58, 63, 246; Biblical: 93; Byzantine: 3;
mystical: viii, xi–xiii, xviii, xx–xxi, cataphatic: 93; Catholic: 254, 274;
xxviii, xxxiv, 3, 15, 17, 22, 29, 31, Cistercian: xxxiv, 114, 228;
Index 415
contemplative: xxxvii; Dionysian: 113, 139, 232, 284, 301–302, 320;

93, 136–54; dogmatic: xxiii, 16; ecstatic: 139; mystical: xxiv, 28–29,
Eastern: xxvi; monastic: xxxvi, 47, 65–67, 80, 91, 156, 164, 213,
245–46; moral: xxiii, 16; mystical: 235; of love: 59, 180, 186, 249–50;
viii–ix, xiv, xxxiv, xxxvi, xxxviii, of wills: 228, 249–50, 295;
liii, 3–4, 15–16, 35, 76, 219, 278; transforming: 239; with God:
Platonic: 93; spiritual: xxxiv, 277, xxxii, 66, 73, 79, 81, 101, 112, 119,
347; supernatural: 347; Western: 30 163, 185, 201, 212–13, 222, 232,
Traherne, Thomas: xlviii 246, 248–49, 287, 295–96, 301, 303,
training: in virtue: 22; spiritual: 19 305, 326; with others: 160; without
tranquillity: 65, 103–104, 106, 129, 240, distinction: 186
309, 315–16, 318 United Nations: 134
transcendence, divine: 73, 81, 142 unity: 127–28, 160, 177, 191, 228, 292;
transfiguration: 126–27, 148, 332, 340 in Christ: 121, 128, 131, 141; with
transformation: xxxi, 38, 41, 58, 65, God: 128; with men: 127–28, 228
67, 80, 122, 126, 179, 211, 228, 263, unknowing: xxviii–xxix, 73, 76, 80–82,
327, 331, 336 94, 144, 161, 192, 211
Trent, Council of: xiv, liii, 215, 221, 268 Ursulines: 270
trial(s): 239–40, 265–66, 279, 295–97,
306, 312, 323 Valla, Lorenzo: 138
tribulation: 209 Valladolid: 222
Trinitarians: 181 Vallées, Marie des: 271
Trinity: xxiii–xxiv, xxviii, xxx, 39–40, value(s): 291, 317
77, 97–98, 100, 109–10, 117–18, 120, Vandenbroucke, François, osb: 26, 176
143, 158, 160, 177, 180, 239–40 Van der Meer de Walcheren, Christine:
Tronson, Louis: 270 258
tropoi: 129, 133 Van der Meer de Walcheren, Pierre:
trust: 21, 111, 209, 293, 298, 322 258–59
truth(s): xl, xlvii, 39–40, 46, 69, 78, 101, Van Doren, Mark: xii, xvi–xvii
161, 167, 177, 179, 191, 239, 243, vanity: xii, 111, 302, 340
248–49, 263, 279, 290, 299–300, 302, Varillon, François: 75
334; divine: xxxi, xliv, 77, 126, 190 vernacular: 182, 195, 203
Tugwell, Simon op: 56 Vernet, Félix: 210, 213–14, 216–17
Turbessi, Joseph: 140, 149–50, 153 via negativa: xxvii, 81, 142, 150
vice(s): 165, 265, 321, 323–24
Underhill, Evelyn: liv, 3, 214–15 vicissitudo: 190, 338
understanding: 52, 54, 86, 110, 112–13, Victorines: 145–47, 150, 155, 169–70
151–52, 165, 176, 178, 191, 230–31, Vienne, Council of: 183
238, 242–43, 251, 265, 275, 301–302, vigilance: 230–31
306, 313, 318–19, 326 Viller, M., sj: 32, 97, 99, 115
union: ix, 39, 47, 54, 113, 152, 177, 182, Vincent de Paul, St.: 270
194, 201, 207, 228–29, 239, 249, virgin(s): 47, 266
270, 303–305, 331; bridal: 146; virginity: 92, 103; of spirit: 92; spiritual:
contemplative: ix, xxxiii; divine: 81
virtue(s): 22, 47, 55, 87, 89, 95, 129, 276; of God: 101, 104, 106, 126,
147, 149, 164, 177, 182–83, 185–86, 202–204, 237, 249, 252, 265, 274–75,
192, 196, 201, 204, 219, 227, 233, 299
238, 242–44, 255, 262–64, 285, 301, William of Afflighem: 185
303, 321, 323, 330, 332, 338; false: William of Champeaux: 146
290; theological: 86, 299, 320 William of St. Thierry: 18, 31–33, 64–
vision(s): xxix, xxxvi, xlix, 28, 41, 53, 65, 73–74, 84, 90, 149–50, 171, 185,
56, 83, 85, 107, 110, 112–13, 128, 190, 214, 228, 332
142, 149, 163–64, 166, 168–69, 180, Williams, Rowan: 30, 34
192, 196, 211, 214, 223, 234, 295–97, Wilmart, André, osb: 218
300, 303, 308, 325; beatific: 119; Windesheim, Congregation of: 215
false: 113; imaginary: 240, 301; wisdom: xxix–xxxii, xlix, 3, 21, 57, 85–
ineffable: 70; intellectual: 90, 239– 86, 90, 108, 116, 125–27, 131, 152,
40; of God: 36, 59, 61, 94, 96, 150, 157, 167, 178–79, 208, 219, 228, 251,
334–35; sophianic: 125; spiritual: 263, 319, 327, 336, 338; divine:
301 326–27; Hellenic: 58; human: 175–
visionaries: 16, 170–71, 195–96; false: 76; multiform: 108, 122; natural:
289 211
vocation(s): 25, 35, 55, 58, 61, 103, 133, witches: 184, 193
193, 217, 227, 234, 251, 257, 259, woman: 182, 193–95
268, 272, 275, 278, 290–93, 298, Word: divine: 127, 177; divinity of:
310, 320, 324, 327 60–61, 66; incarnate: 38, 66, 186,
Von Hügel, Friedrich: 25 206; kiss of: 131; of God: xxiii, 36–
vow(s): 183, 274–75 37, 40, 45, 51, 57, 61, 77, 79, 95, 125,
vünkelin: 153, 200 130, 132, 146, 158, 200, 201, 338
work(s): 126, 129, 186–87, 201–202,
Waddell, Chrysogonus, ocso: 40 212, 250, 290, 315, 320–21, 324;
Waldensians: 173 active: 321; good: 188–89
war: lii, 347 world: 39–40, 43, 46, 55, 71, 100, 139,
warfare, spiritual: 19–20, 330 156, 318
watching: 108 worship: xxxii, 104, 126, 194
Watkin, E. I.: xlvi, lii wrath: 323
weakness(es): 300, 309, 325, 328, 345, Wu, John C. H.: xii
347; cyclothymic: 288–89; Wyclif, John: 194
hysterical: 289; neurasthenic: 287–
88; paranoid: 289; schizoid: 288 Ximenes de Cisneros, Francisco: 221–
Wesenmystik: 155–56, 185 22
wholeness: 127
will: xxix, 35, 65, 87, 89, 127, 143, 146, Yoga: 232, 263
155–56, 159–60, 175, 180, 191, 197,
201–203, 208, 230, 238, 244, 290, Zaccaria, Anthony Maria, St.: 269
305–306, 308, 313, 319, 326, 329–30; Zahn, Gordon: liv–lv
divine: xxxii, 211, 264, 319, 336; zeal: 103, 211, 219
free: 207; human: 66, 249; of Christ: Zen: ix, xlii, xlv, 33, 199

MERTON An Introduction To Christian Mysticism

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

MERTON An Introduction To Christian Mysticism

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

MERTON An Introduction To Christian Mysticism

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

monastic wisdom series: number thirteen

Patrick Hart, ocso, General Editor

MW1 Cassian and the Fathers:

Edited with an Introduction by

The work of Cistercian Publications is made possible in part by support from

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

Merton, Thomas, 1915–1968.

Printed in the United States of America

An Introduction to Christian Mysticism 1

Appendix A: Textual Notes 349

Appendix B: For Further Reading 381

In the 1949–1951 correspondence between the newly or-

has set a high standard with his editions of Merton’s novitiate

tradition. In a distinction as old as Origen’s prologue to his com-

The series of conferences that comprise An Introduction to

. Thomas Merton, Witness to Freedom: Letters in Times of Crisis, ed. William

through May 19, when Merton noted in his journal, “Finished

the young priests, but circumstantial evidence suggests that Mer-

Wednesday afternoon (rain). The Pastoral Theology group

As he points out in his Foreword, while the “approach has been

an effort to broaden the horizons and deepen the perspec-

. Turning Toward the World, 102.

They reflect Merton’s core belief, the foundation as well of his

. In his January 14 letter to Herbert Mason, Merton had written, “I want

receive extensive discussion, in a context that reflects a consider-

10. Merton notes in his journal that he is “writing up mystical theology

However, following the section on St. Teresa, the entire rest of

on October 10 he writes in his journal, “The other day I finally

20. Turning Toward the World, 169.

cal theology notes because of the relevance of the material rather

If this “course” is restricted to twenty-two lectures in the

is presumed everybody has, and to orient that asceticism

Though the heading “Ascetical and Mystical Theol-

developing during the period when Merton was teaching the

very outset is the intrinsic relationship between mysticism and

the great mystical tradition . . . is not separated from the

While he is critical of a sterile intellectual approach to the Chris-

The mysticism and the dogmatic theology of the Church are

Soteriology is presented as equally central to any authentically

what the martyr undergoes physically every Christian must

The tradition of the martyrs makes it clear that to attain

Merton finds this same focus to be central as well in his own

We see in Bernard the full mystical explicitation of what

By “mysticism” we can mean the personal experience of

The loss of this interpenetration of doctrine and experience in

importance of the via negativa, the apophatic dimension, in these

He stresses the special character of Western mysticism as a

He observes, “This distinction is important and we shall see that

“unknowing” in contemplative experience. In writing of Gregory

beyond both forms of discursive theology, cataphatic and

tification for existing. It is a transcendent and experi-

But Merton is also convinced that the tendency on the part

development first formulated by Evagrius, between the ascetical

30. See Donald P. St. John, “The Flowering of Natural Contemplation:

in and through nature, in and through things He has created, in

Man by theoria is able to unite the hidden wisdom of God

This indwelling wisdom is not only the source of reformation

sacramentality of God’s works but “exercises a spiritualizing

with Poulain about the relationship between asceticism and mys-