The Wiley-Blackwell Companion to Christian Mysticism

Julia A. Lamm, Julia A. Lamm

• Publisher: Wiley-Blackwell
• Year: 2012
• ISBN:
  9781118232750
• Edition: 1
• Topic: Teología y religión
• Subtopic: Misticismo

The Wiley-Blackwell Companion to Christian Mysticism brings together a team of leading international scholars to explore the origins, evolution, and contemporary debates relating to Christian mystics, texts, and the movements they inspired.

• Provides a comprehensive and engaging account of Christian mysticism, from its origins right up to the present day
• Draws on the best of current scholarship by bringing together a collection of newly-commissioned readings by leading scholars
• Considers examples of mysticism in both Eastern and Western Christianity
• Offers a brilliant synthesis of the key figures and historical periods of mysticism; its core themes, such as heresy, gender, or aesthetics; and its theoretical considerations, including theological, literary, social scientific, and philosophical approaches
• Features chapters on current debates such as neuroscience and mystical experience, and inter-religious dialogue

CHAPTER 1

A Guide to Christian Mysticism

Julia A. Lamm

Christian mysticism is a variegated landscape, and this chapter will provide a Guide. In it, I help orient the reader by highlighting the main roads and some by-ways, some sign posts, and some description of difficult, fascinating, and (some might say) wild terrain that is Christian mysticism. It is written primarily for students and scholars who, in one sense or another, are new to the study of mysticism: for those completely new to the topic, who have never read mystical texts or specifically Christian mystical texts; for those perhaps familiar with one era or text, but who want to explore others; for those familiar with a text from one perspective or discipline, but who may want to delve into it more deeply as a specifically mystical, religious text; and, finally, for those who teach, or want to teach, some aspect of mysticism, but who are unsure about how to field certain questions.

The point of this Guide is not, therefore, so much to determine and define Christian mysticism as it is to provide tools, reference points, and categories so that readers themselves may explore, determine, define, and judge. I begin with some fundamental issues of definition (what is Christian mysticism?) and classification (who are the mystics? what distinguishes a text or experience as mystical?) and then turn, in the last part of the chapter, to discuss just four of what are countless elements of mystical texts in the Christian tradition and the challenges they present for interpreting those texts (what do you look for in a mystical text? how do you interpret it?). This chapter thus begins with more abstract matters and moves increasingly toward the more concrete. To the degree possible, I resist citing other scholarship on mysticism, which would only direct the reader out to other secondary sources; collectively, the other chapters do that work, offering extensive coverage of the state of scholarship in the field. The point of this Guide is to direct readers to the primary texts and, as further aid, to refer them to relevant discussions in the other chapters, so that the full potential of this volume as a true companion might be realized.

What Is Christian Mysticism?

One thing to bear in mind is the inherently elusive and pluriform nature of Christian mysticism. This is true, of course, of any “-ism,” but it is inherently true of mysticism, which defies and resists stagnation, reification, or essentialism. There is not one kind of Christian mysticism, which makes definition so difficult. Nonetheless, definitions are important for orientation, and so that is where we begin.

As several chapters in this volume note, the term “mysticism” (and its cognates in other languages) is a modern construct that scholars have employed in order to identify, explain, and categorize certain perceived ways of being religious or expressing religiosity. Sometimes “mysticism” or “mystic” has been used as a weapon to stigmatize, other times as an accolade. To recognize the term “mysticism” as a construct is not, however, to concede that it is entirely arbitrary. Its roots go back to the more ancient Greek terms “mystery” (mysterion) and “mystical” (mystikos),¹ both of which are found in early Christian texts, although whether they are scriptural is another matter.² Still, remembering that “mysticism” is a modern construction does serve to caution that we need to take care in defining and applying the term. For just as what we call “Christian mysticism” has a history, so too does the study of mysticism: each of the many definitions of mysticism proffered since the seventeenth century carries with it particular associations and attitudes born of particular historical contexts, replete with their own polemics and prejudices. Since several of the chapters that follow present the history and problem of definition in detail, I will not rehearse that here.³ It may be instructive, however, to have some definitions close at hand and to provide a brief outline of that history in order to underscore how attitudes shift and also to help orient readers regarding current debates concerning the study of Christian mysticism.

In the French context, Michel de Certeau (1925–1986) traced la mystique back to the early seventeenth century, arguing that the term emerged precisely with the modern world and its sense of loss of, and nostalgia for, the presence of God.⁴ At the same time, it was also used as a way of delegitimizing and thus marginalizing certain religious movements and what came to be known as Quietism. In the Anglo-American context, the designation mysticism was coined in the mid-eighteenth century and was used pejoratively, as a kind of shorthand by Enlightenment figures to identify false religion and thus to dismiss individuals and sects deemed to be fanatical, or simply crazy.⁵ Similarly, in the late eighteenth century, German Enlightenment philosophers (most notably Immanuel Kant) used der Mystizismus in a strongly negative sense. With some exceptions, this continued into the nineteenth century, with Protestant scholars often using die Mystik or der Mystizismus polemically as derogatory designations for Catholicism and Pietism.

Usages and attitudes began to shift around the turn of the twentieth century, in large part due to the works of William James (1842–1910) and Evelyn Underhill (1875–1941).⁶ Protestant scholars of religion began to view “mysticism” as a useful, and more positive, tool to define certain “types” of religious experience.⁷ Some also saw “mysticism” as a way of getting at something they took to be universal in the human spirit and common to many religions. In Catholic thought, due in part to a reaction within Catholicism against rationalism, “mysticism” was at once a way to name the movement to reintegrate academic theology and prayer and a way to canonize academically those authorities already canonized as saints.

The study of Christian mysticism underwent another significant shift beginning in the 1980s, when in the fields of history, literature and theology there was more interest in social history, a push to expand the canon (or challenge the very notion of canon), and increasing emphasis on the local – on particular geographical, historical, cultural, and linguistic contexts. This shift both inspired and was inspired by careful textual work, the result being new critical editions and translations of primary texts deemed mystical. New scholarship inspired by feminist critique, literary criticism, deconstruction, and post-modern sensibilities challenged the confessional stances of the nineteenth and twentieth centuries. Many mystics came to be appreciated as inhabiting the periphery of Christian thought and spirituality, or even the territories beyond, and have come to be celebrated as being heterodox or heretical. In short, the student of Christian mysticism needs to be aware, at the very least, of his or her own assumptions of what makes a text a mystical text, and what attitude or valuation is attached to that.

At present mysticism appears to be enjoying a more positive status than in the past, although it still has its detractors. Rather than being a tool of inter- and intra-denominational polemics within Christianity, it is appealed to as a resource for overcoming such polemics. Similarly, it has also provided a fruitful avenue to pursue interreligious dialogue⁸ and has produced a growing sub-field for interdisciplinary studies, as this volume demonstrates. At the popular level, the topic of mysticism seems also to have struck a chord, perhaps because of the well-documented trend away from traditional, institutional religions. Yet it is fair to ask whether the danger now is that it has become too commonplace, almost to the point where “mystical” functions as a substitute for “religious” or “spiritual.” What some would call simply “religion,” “piety,” or “faith” others call “mysticism.”

Arguably the most influential, because most cited, definition in the field at the present time is Bernard McGinn’s. His scholarship on Christian mysticism (a multi-volume work, The Presence of God: A History of Western Christian Mysticism, translations and countless articles, and his having trained a generation of scholars at the University of Chicago) has shaped the field enormously. McGinn defines Christian mysticism “a special consciousness of the presence of God that by definition exceeds description and results in a transformation of the subject who receives it” (1998: 26). Understanding some of the choices he has made with this definition – what it excludes as much as what it includes – can help us get a sense, at least, of the status of current debates.

Let us consider just three of McGinn’s decisions. First, consciousness. McGinn explains that he chooses “consciousness” over the oft-used “experience” because the latter is too ambiguous and tends to emphasize discrete experiences. While not wanting to eliminate “experience” altogether, McGinn does want to challenge an over-emphasis on separated and paranormal experiences, emphasizing instead sustained processes and bringing to the fore “forms of language” (1991: xviii). He could also be influenced here by the deep suspicion many scholars of religion have about the appeal to experience: they read it as an attempt to seal off a part of oneself from scientific scrutiny. Second, presence. Here McGinn explicitly takes his cue from a particular passage by Teresa of Avila (1515–1582),⁹ which he thinks captures what so many Christian mystics are trying to get at. He is also likely trying to correct the tendency of many scholars who are attracted to some Christian mystics’ compelling descriptions of absence, a concept that has deep resonance in a post-modern world. While much mystical language about absence is indeed existentially powerful and poetically stirring, for the Christian mystic the consciousness of divine absence is always related to consciousness of divine presence. Third, transformation. With this, again, McGinn resists previous tendencies to view mysticism as connected to isolated, irrational, or paranormal events. He points instead to a transformative process and sustained way of living that is at once moral, intellectual, and spiritual. In all of this, it is important to remember that McGinn sees his own definition as heuristic description, and he is clear in pointing out that – while certainly informed by larger debates in the fields of religious studies, philosophy, and the social sciences – it has taken particular shape inductively, from his close reading of Christian texts.

Many chapters in this volume explicitly employ McGinn’s definition, thereby demonstrating how capacious and illuminating it can be.¹⁰ Many others, however, offer their own definitions. I glean just some of these from various chapters below in order to underscore the importance, difficulty, and provisional nature of the act of defining something that, almost by its very nature, resists definition. These examples were not necessarily intended to be formal definitions, but could arguably function as such; each arises from the particularities of the assigned topic. This should serve, too, to remind us that the process of defining, especially defining something as huge as Christian mysticism, requires a continual movement between the particular and the more gen­eral. Having several working definitions in mind, the reader might then approach the subject matter with some confidence – enough perhaps to refine those definitions. In my own discussion, I intentionally alternate among many definitions and terms – for example, referring to consciousness, experience, encounter, knowledge, etc. – thus highlighting the pluriform nature of our subject matter.

Barbara Newman, in “Gender,” describes mysticism as “a quest for experiential union with God,” which “seeks to transcend all categories of human thought, including sex and gender.”¹¹ Michael Cusato, in his chapter on the Spiritual Franciscans, writes, “This spiritual understanding was not of an intellectual order (one of superior intelligence) but rather of an intimate, fuller and more immediate experience of God – hence, the connection to mysticism.”¹² Finally, George Demacopolous, reminding us of differences between the Latin western traditions and Greek eastern traditions, explains that the term mysticism refers “to the relevant categories of thought that capture the Byzantine understanding of the mystery or, perhaps more properly, the ‘hidden mystery’ of divine/human communion.”¹³ And last, to round out these definitions, I cite that offered by David B. Perrin in his chapter, “Mysticism,” for the Blackwell Companion to Christian Spirituality: “[T]he radical surrender of self to the loving embrace of the Other who is at the foundation of all life, the One to whom we owe our very existence … Thus, to enter into...