What Christian Mysticism is ...

[Thomas]

... and what it isn't.

An aphorism, attributed to cardinal Henry Newmans, says "Mysticism starts in a 'mist', centres on an 'I', and ends in 'schism.'

At its heart, 'Christian mysticism' embraces Christian life and practice genuinely lived, it's found in Scripture, and begins and ends in worship.

Here I am talking about 'mysticism' as traditionally understood, not in any fuzzy egalitarian or amorphous sense as it is generally used and understood.

St Paul speaks of the faithful as "that their hearts, being joined together in love, might be encouraged onward toward all the riches of full certainty in
understanding, for full knowledge (ἐπίγνωσιν epignōsis 'precise and correct knowledge') of the mystery of God, and of the Father, and of Christ, in whom are all the treasures of wisdom and of knowledge hid (θησαυροὶ σοφίας καὶ γνώσεως ἀπόκρυφοι thēsauros sophia kai gnōsis apokryphos)

+++

Today there is the allure of the talk of Meditation or Centering Prayer or Hesychasm or any other 'techniques' (a repugnant term, in this context), or look into the writings of Bonaventure or Cusa or Eckhart, Dante or Blake, or the esotericism of Valentin Tomberg, and there's nothing wrong with that, so long as one is grounded first.

Rule of thumb: The more fringe it is, the more dubious. Or rather, the more fringe, the more risky.

The key, the ground, is right disposition ...

 

[TheLightWithin]

I always thought mysticism, in any religion, had something to do with having more contact with the Divine, and some kind of revelatory experience, like visions, dreams, guidance, or something of that sort. (occasionally physical effects like stigmata or something)

 

[Thomas]

I always thought mysticism, in any religion, had something to do with having more contact with the Divine, and some kind of revelatory experience, like visions, dreams, guidance, or something of that sort. (occasionally physical effects like stigmata or something)

Well, to be fair, anyone who attends a Liturgy in any religion is to some degree in contact with the Divine.

Not that we are ever not, but Liturgies, Meditations, Prayer, etc., is a bit like simply paying attention ... a date-night, kind of thing, or if that comes across as too irreverend, is's mindfulness.

A Liturgy then is, at that level, a whole-body experience, engaging the whole of one, physically, mentally, spiritually.

Revelatory 'experiences' are rare, in fact very rare, and not at all the aim or point of spiritual ascesis. And the idea of 'experience' is itself quite modern, and the idea that subjective experience – or the lack thereof – serve to validate or invalidate religious claims is a specious claim.

The theologian Denys Turner wrote The Darkness of God, and his thesis is that really, from the writings of St Paul ('through a glass, darkly') and St John, through the Fathers and on through the Medieval to the Modern era, the soul meets God in a "cloud of unknowing", a divine darkness of ignorance, a meeting with God beyond all comprehension and beyond all experiencing.

This is not to dismiss the revelations made known to the mystics – simply to point out that the aim of the Christian life, which is essentially mystical however much it is mundane and everyday – is not in chasing 'experiences'.

 

[rocala]

I always thought mysticism, in any religion, had something to do with having more contact with the Divine, and some kind of revelatory experience, like visions, dreams, guidance, or something of that sort.

I tend to agree, although I would probably have said "deeper contact with the divine,"

 

[wil]

@Thomas tell me how ai did

Christian mysticism has a rich and diverse history, with countless figures who have sought a direct and personal experience of the Divine. Here are some prominent Christian mystics from the past, spanning various eras and traditions:
Early and Medieval Period:
* Augustine of Hippo (354-430): Though not exclusively a mystic, his writings emphasize the personal nature of union with God.
* Pseudo-Dionysius the Areopagite (5th-6th century): An anonymous writer whose works heavily influenced Christian mystical theology, particularly regarding "apophatic" or negative theology (describing God by what He is not).
* Symeon the New Theologian (949-1022): A Byzantine monk who emphasized the possibility of direct experience of God's light.
* Hildegard of Bingen (1098-1179): A Benedictine abbess, visionary, composer, and writer, known for her vivid mystical experiences and extensive theological and scientific writings.
* Bernard of Clairvaux (1090-1153): A Cistercian abbot and influential theologian who wrote extensively on the love of God and the spiritual life.
* Francis of Assisi (c. 1182-1226): Founder of the Franciscan Order, known for his deep love of creation, voluntary poverty, and mystical experiences, including receiving the stigmata.
* Mechthild of Magdeburg (c. 1207-1282/1295): A Beguine mystic who wrote "The Flowing Light of the Godhead," describing her visions and experiences of divine love.
* Bonaventure (1221-1274): A Franciscan theologian and philosopher who wrote on the soul's journey into God.
* Meister Eckhart (c. 1260-1328): A German Dominican theologian and philosopher whose sermons and writings emphasized the birth of God in the soul and detachment.
* Angela of Foligno (c. 1248-1309): A Franciscan mystic who experienced profound spiritual conversions and dictated her intense visions.
* Julian of Norwich (c. 1342-c. 1430): An English anchoress whose "Revelations of Divine Love" is considered the first book in English written by a woman. She is known for her optimistic theology and concept of God's motherly love.
* Catherine of Siena (1347-1380): A Dominican tertiary, mystic, and influential figure in the Church, known for her visions, spiritual marriage to Christ, and active involvement in political and ecclesiastical affairs.
* The author of "The Cloud of Unknowing" (late 14th century): An anonymous English mystic who advocated for a contemplative prayer that moves beyond concepts and images to a direct encounter with God in darkness and silence.
Early Modern to Modern Period:
* Teresa of Ávila (1515-1582): A Spanish Carmelite nun, reformer, and Doctor of the Church, renowned for her writings on contemplative prayer and the stages of the spiritual life, including "The Interior Castle."
* John of the Cross (1542-1591): A Spanish Carmelite friar and priest, a key figure in the Catholic Reformation, and a Doctor of the Church. His works, like "Dark Night of the Soul," explore the purification of the soul on its journey to God.
* Jakob Böhme (1575-1624): A German shoemaker and mystic whose writings explored the nature of God, good and evil, and the creation of the universe.
* Brother Lawrence of the Resurrection (c. 1611-1691): A Carmelite lay brother known for his simple yet profound practice of "practicing the presence of God" in everyday life.
* William Blake (1757-1827): An English poet, painter, and printmaker who incorporated mystical and visionary elements into his art and writings.
* Thérèse of Lisieux (1873-1897): A French Carmelite nun and Doctor of the Church, known for her "Little Way" of spiritual childhood and trust in God's love.
* Thomas Merton (1915-1968): An American Trappist monk and writer who explored Christian mysticism, contemplation, and interfaith dialogue.
This is by no means an exhaustive list, as Christian mysticism has taken many forms and been expressed by countless individuals throughout history.

 

[Thomas]

I tend to agree, although I would probably have said "deeper contact with the divine,"

I do not disagree, but when most people talk about 'mysticism', they're thinking of the 'far end', as it were, the likes of Julian of Norwich, St Teresa or St John of the Cross, St Catherine and the like ...

My point would be, not having a 'mystical experience' does not mean one is not mystically engaged. The sacraments are mystical. The liturgy is mystical.

If one reads Scripture, where are the mystics and mages? Notably absent. Instead, there are just people, going about their lives, and Jesus stands in awe of their 'blind faith' – their simple acceptance, their 'Yes' to God without proof or prior evidence.

The dialogue with Thomas at the end of John's Gospel – John 20:26-29 are the key to the whole thing: "Jesus saith to him: 'Because thou hast seen me, Thomas, thou hast believed: blessed are they that have not seen, and have believed'."

 

[Thomas]

tell me how ai did

Well ... it's just a list of Christian mystics?

Christian mysticism has a rich and diverse history, with countless figures who have sought a direct and personal experience of the Divine.

I'm not so sure they 'sought direct and personal experience of the Divine' as a 'direct and personal union with the Divine' – so I would correct ai on that score.

But then, that is the aim of every Christian life, to some degree. In that sense every Christian is a mystic, every Christian is involved in a mystical religion, 'a mystery religion' as the ancient world would see it – I certainly claim such.

My point is the nature of that experience. Not everyone today would be satisfied with their descriptions of that, being largely a 'not-knowing'.

Augustine speaks of feeling the touch of God "just lightly." As an experience, he speaks of "the greatest possible delights of our bodily sense, radiant as they might be with the brightest of corporeal light, could not be compared with the joys of that [spiritual] life" – that is, no bodily sense, no experience, could match the spiritual life, which concurs with the idea of 'Divine Darkness', the 'Cloud of Unknowing', or 'Divine Ignorance'.

This against the background against the mystical sense that the apophatic way, the Way of Negation, is 'higher' than the cataphatic – especially when the latter speaks in the language rich in imagery and sensorial experience – a style of mystical language that is primarily Western and arose during the Middle Ages. We, of course, have to read this language with a careful eye. Certainly the Orthodox East views the language of some of the West's greatest saints – St Ignatius Loyola, St Teresa of Avila, St John of the Cross, with a degree, if not suspicion, then sympathy that these persons did not go further into the realms beyond the sensorial.

Whilst the East might speak of 'light', the West might speak of 'love', and even the experience of Divine Love is essentially a 'dark knowing', as it were.

 

[rocala]

I do not disagree, but when most people talk about 'mysticism', they're thinking of the 'far end', as it were, the likes of Julian of Norwich, St Teresa or St John of the Cross, St Catherine and the like ...

My point would be, not having a 'mystical experience' does not mean one is not mystically engaged. The sacraments are mystical. The liturgy is mystical.

If one reads Scripture, where are the mystics and mages? Notably absent. Instead, there are just people, going about their lives, and Jesus stands in awe of their 'blind faith' – their simple acceptance, their 'Yes' to God without proof or prior evidence.

The dialogue with Thomas at the end of John's Gospel – John 20:26-29 are the key to the whole thing: "Jesus saith to him: 'Because thou hast seen me, Thomas, thou hast believed: blessed are they that have not seen, and have believed'."

Thank you Thomas, the third time that I read your reply...there was something. Where is this going?

 

[TheLightWithin]

This is not to dismiss the revelations made known to the mystics – simply to point out that the aim of the Christian life, which is essentially mystical however much it is mundane and everyday – is not in chasing 'experiences'.

For those who believe scriptures are divinely revealed, is this considered mysticism? A sub set of mysticism? A separate class of things somehow?

 

[wil]

Well ... it's just a list of Christian mystics?

I suppose that is the answer...all of them you see as valid Christian Mystics?

I mean they didn't add Charles Filmore or Edgar Cayce...well that is until I asked...

Yes, both Charles Fillmore and Edgar Cayce are often considered Christian mystics, though their approaches and specific beliefs diverged from mainstream Christianity in significant ways.

Charles Fillmore (Co-founder of Unity Church):

Christian Connection: Fillmore founded Unity, a movement that identifies as Christian and draws heavily from Biblical scripture. He offered metaphysical interpretations of the Bible and Christian ideas, focusing on the divine power within individuals.
Mystical Aspect: He is widely recognized as an "American mystic" for his focus on spiritual interpretations, the connection between mind and body, and the practical application of spiritual principles for transformation and healing. He emphasized inner experience and the direct connection to God within.
New Thought Influence: Unity is part of the New Thought movement, which itself incorporates elements of mysticism, spiritualism, and Eastern philosophies while maintaining a connection to Christian terminology and concepts.
Edgar Cayce ("The Sleeping Prophet"):

Christian Connection: Cayce considered himself a devout Christian, was a Sunday school teacher, read the Bible annually, and was a member of the Disciples of Christ church. He often expressed a desire for a "normal, simple, ordinary Christian life."
Mystical Aspect: He is widely referred to as a "Christian mystic" and "intuitive healer." His "readings," delivered in a self-induced trance, explored spiritual concepts like reincarnation, karma, and universal consciousness, often interpreting them through a Christian lens. He believed in the "Akashic Record" and spoke of the "Son, the Logos, or the Word" as the source of creation.
Controversy and New Age: While Cayce himself denied being a Spiritualist or communicating with spirits, and lived before the formal emergence of the New Age movement, his work is seen by many as foundational to and influential on New Age beliefs, particularly regarding reincarnation and esoteric interpretations of spirituality. This aspect sometimes puts him at odds with traditional Christian theology.
In summary, both men deeply engaged with Christian teachings and scripture, but their interpretations and expanded spiritual understandings, particularly their emphasis on direct spiritual experience and concepts often considered outside of traditional dogma, lead to their classification as Christian mystics.

 

[Thomas]

Thank you Thomas, the third time that I read your reply...there was something. Where is this going?

I'll have to get back to you on that ...

 

[Thomas]

For those who believe scriptures are divinely revealed, is this considered mysticism? A sub set of mysticism? A separate class of things somehow?

That's a good question ... I suppose I would say the 'mystical' element is a belief that there is a real, living interaction between the person and the Divine.

I don't mean having experiences, seeing angels or hearing voices ... no need of any of that ... it's what faith is all about.

Many good and faithful Christians would, I think, hesitate to go so far, but really that is a shame, because that is the case.

 

[Thomas]

I suppose that is the answer...all of them you see as valid Christian Mystics?

I am not in a position to validate mystical experiences, any more than I am able to rule them out. I keep an open mind, and accept what seems reasonable to me, within the context of my faith and understanding.

St Teresa of Avila recounts a story of a nun, perhaps even a novice, who used to cry out, making 'ecstatic ejaculations' and annoying the other nuns. Teresa spent some time with her and discerned that the woman, of poor, peasant stock, was having authentic mystical experiences, but being unable to process the experience, they just burst out of her ...

+++

Charles Fillmore (Co-founder of Unity Church):

He is widely recognized as an "American mystic" ...

An 'American mystic' but not essentially a 'Christian mystic' within the Christian Mystical Tradition. As I understand it, Christ is neither the Logos of God nor the principle 'person' in New Thought, rather he is an exemplar of the New Thought thinking which is not itself necessarily Christian.

(I think 'American mystic' says a lot ...)

Edgar Cayce ("The Sleeping Prophet"):
Christian Connection: Cayce considered himself a devout Christian, was a Sunday school teacher, read the Bible annually, and was a member of the Disciples of Christ church. He often expressed a desire for a "normal, simple, ordinary Christian life."

I think Cayce is a clairvoyant, but not a mystic? As the article says:
"While Cayce himself denied being a Spiritualist or communicating with spirits ..."
So no 'I and Thou' experience?

In summary, both men deeply engaged with Christian teachings and scripture, but their interpretations and expanded spiritual understandings, particularly their emphasis on direct spiritual experience and concepts often considered outside of traditional dogma, lead to their classification as Christian mystics.

Does it though ... maybe, but both fall short of how I understand it.

Me, personally, I am cautious in reception. There's more goes no that meets the eye, thatI know for sure, so I would not speak dogmatically about either Fillmore or Cayce.

Regarding New Thought, I see it in the context of the 'Mind Cure Movement', validating itself within a broad religious framework of selective influences – Christian and Hindu, and informed by speculations in psychology and idealism.

Regarding Cayce – don't know – never read him in detail, seeming conflicted in himself between his Presbyterian faith and the fruits of his clairvoyant trances.

As ever ... context ... sitz im leben.

If you look at the development of New Thought in America, the emphasis is not really Christianity as such, but Christian teachings filtered through a New Thought lens of self-healing and self-empowerment. I think Christianity figures because it emerged in a Christian milieu, but that's my personal take. A new Thought version of the Parable of the Good Samaritan would have the beaten man pick himself up, dust himself down, and change his mindset, so that next time he passed, the robbers would have looked and thought 'Not this guy, he's too much'.

(There is a Buddhist martial arts teaching along those lines.)

When Reiki was introduced to America, there was a fiction spun around its founder, Usui Mikao, giving him Christian background and inspiration for his healing technique, which was purely to make it acceptable in a post-war American marketplace. I think New Thought happened the same way, but more organically, in that Christian reiki is a fabrication, whereas Christian New Thought is an interpretation.

 

[Thomas]

Thank you Thomas, the third time that I read your reply...there was something. Where is this going?

I would suggest the idea that every traditional Christian is a mystic, in that they are engaged in a mystical process.

'Being mystical' is not about having 'experiences', it's about having a faith and belief in God who is immanently present to us; it's about dwelling in that presence. Then it's about 'quieting the world' so one can just ... sit.

 

[Thomas]

Thank you Thomas, the third time that I read your reply...there was something. Where is this going?

Going deeper ...

In the Mystical Tradition, The Jesus Prayer, or The Prayer of the Heart, says it all:
Lord Jesus Christ, Son of God, have mercy on me, a sinner

+++

There are many versions of the prayer, and the traditional teaching is the words are not the point, it's the disposition.
A shortened version could be:
Kyrie eleison, from the Greek, 'Lord have mercy.'

+++

There are two elements to this prayer (and, in fact, all Christian prayer):

The first is simply an address to God as a reality, and as real, as present.
In the commentaries, we perhaps move into a deeper, more profound state of silent prayer, of contemplation, and maybe even, however liminally or fleetingly, find ourselves in that Presence, but the reality is, He is never not present.

The second is about disposition. He is the Healer of Souls, we are, in Him, a new creation. It is the acceptance of the Indwelling of the Holy Spirit. Our "have mercy on me, a sinner" is not a politeness, there's no false piety, nor any Divine obligation, it's simply a recognition of what is. It's a summation of the human condition. Any resistance to that is simply pride.

The Gospels are full of accounts of Jesus receiving those who turn to Him as a last resort – the High Priest, the Centurion, the Robber on the Cross – all had reached that point of realisation – in their condition, they are helpless.

Without those two fundamental and essential truths, both real and present in and to us, Salvation and Sin, there is no point in trying to 'go deeper' or seek for 'mystical experience' (itself often sought for our own gratification).

Authentic Christian mysticism is not found in the arcane or the esoteric, there is no trick or technique, ther's no way to 'trigger' an 'experience' or storm the gates of heaven. And most of all, it's not all about me.

Humility and detachment clears the ground.