A Reasonable Mystic

First, let me apologise for the disjointed order of these posts, although I shouldn’t need to apologise – blogging gives an author the freedom to post items as they come to mind. The reader must wait in anticipation to see if and when some order emerges from the heap. Why should I deprive anyone of that adventure?

Today I plan to begin discovering what mysticism is, and I will begin with a definition from Wikipedia:

Mysticism from the Greek μυστικός (mystikos) “an initiate” (of the Eleusinian Mysteries, μυστήρια (mysteria) meaning “initiation“) is the pursuit of achieving communion or identity with, or conscious wareness of, ultimate reality, the divine, spiritual truth, or God through direct experience, intuition, or insight; and the belief that such experience is an important source of knowledge, understanding, and wisdom. Traditions may include a belief in the literal existence of realities beyond empirical perception, or a belief that a true human perception of the world trancends logical reasoning or intellectual comprehension. A person delving in these areas may be called a Mystic.

The term “mysticism” is often used to refer to beliefs which go beyond
the purely exoteric practices of mainstream religions, while still being
related to or based in a mainstream religious doctrine. For example, Kabbalah is a significant mystical movement within Judaism, Sufism is a significant mystical movement within Islam, however Gnosticism can refer to either a mystical movement within Christianity or as various
mystical sects which arose out of Christianity. Some have argued that Christianity itself was a mystical sect that arose out of Judaism. While Eastern religion tend to find the concept of mysticism redundant, non-traditional knowledge and ritual are considered as Esotericism, for example Buddhism’s Vajrayana. Vedanta is considered the mystical branch of Hinduism.

My only interest is in Christian mysticism, so I will give the Wikipedia definition of this:

Mysticism is the philosophy and practice of a direct experience of God. Christian mysticism is traditionally pursued through the practice of the disciplines of prayer (including meditation and contemplation), fasting (including other forms of abstinence and self-denial), and alms-giving, service to others, as discussed by Jesus in the Sermon on the Mount (Matthew 5-7). Other forms of mysticism in general include participation in ecstatic worship and the use of entheogens, the latter not being associated with the mainstream of Christian spirituality. Christians believe that God dwells in Christians through the Holy Spirit, and therefore all Christians can experience God directly.

Without needing to accept that these definitions by the unknown Wikipedia authors are the be-all-and-end-all of truth, one point immediately becomes clear. If mysticism includes “the pursuit of achieving communion … with, or conscious awareness of, … God through direct experience, intuition, or insight; and the belief that such experience is an important source of knowledge, understanding, and Wisdom“, and if “Christians believe that God dwells in Christians through the Holy Spirit, and therefore all Christians can experience God directly“, then all Christians can and, I contend, should be mystics!

Of course, there is at least one growing mystical movement in the Protestant church, alongside the mystical elements of more Catholic and Orthodox traditions, which never went away. This is typically expressed in an exploration of the contemplative traditions, and perhaps accounts for the fact that so many Protestant, and even Evangelical pastors now have Roman Catholic spiritual directors. The movement is typified by such organisations as Renovaré, a Christian renewal para-Church organization founded by Quaker Richard Foster in 1988. There are many other signs and centres of this stream.

Some of the resources of this stream have been useful to us in our teaching people how to hear God’s voice, as can be seen on our listening2god website.

Some Renovare resources:

• Richard Foster (ed), The Renovare Spiritual Formation Bible (Protestant Edition). SanFran, 2005.
• James Smith & Richard Foster, A Spiritual Formation Workbook – Revised edition: Small Group Resources for Nurturing Christian Growth. HarperSanFrancisco, 1999.
• Richard Foster, Devotional Classics: Revised Edition: Selected Readings for Individuals and Groups. HarperSanFrancisco, 1989.
• Richard Foster, Spiritual Classics : Selected Readings for Individuals and Groups on the Twelve Spiritual Disciplines. HarperSanFrancisco, 2000.
• Richard Foster, Celebration of Discipline: The Path to Spiritual Growth. HarperSanFrancisco, 1998.
• Richard Foster, Streams of Living Water: Celebrating the Great Traditions of Christian Faith. HarperSanFrancisco, 2001.

So, what do I mean when I say I am a reasonable mystic? And then, in what sense can I be a reasonable mystic and a Christian?

Such descriptions are open to many interpretations, and misinterpretations, depending on your perspective on the nature of mysticism, the role of reason, and the validity of Christianity as a worldview.

When I coined the term “reasonable mystic” I was unaware of its having been used before. Since then a quick Google search throws up a number of references, many of which are my own websites. A few websites on the Beguines have it refering to William of St. Thierry (1085-1148), a friend of Bernard of Clairvaux. William described in emotional terms the human desire to know God in perfect love, and was also known as the “learned lover“.

Some other references were to a site by Douglas Muder called Tips for a Reasonable Mystic. It was interesting, but contained many ideas with which I could not agree. His characteristics of the next religion sound too much like humanism for my liking. However his definition of a “reasonable mystic” is thought provoking: “someone who wants to be open to the Infinite without losing touch with the Earth under your feet”. I can relate to this approach to life even when I don’t like some of the conclusions. We might come back to Muder later.

There were many in history who, while perhaps not being called “reasonable mystics”, were reasonable and mystical in outlook, and we will encounter some of these in our journey.

In another vein, I found references to being “a reasonable mystic” in discussions of Dumbledore and Shamanismin in Harry Potter, and I’m sure if I dug further that Getafix, the Druid in Asterix would also appear out of the mist.

I guess the point that I am making here is that no matter how anyone else has used the term before, when I speak about being “a reasonable mystic” it means what I mean it to be. Any reading of another meaning into it will just lead to a loss of communication – it is not the term that is important but the content it references. In addition, it will not just be what I say in these articles that makes my definition clear. Rather, as being a reasonable mystic requires, it will be my actions and experiences that determine the truth of what I say. Some evidence for these actions and experiences can be found in other websites – for example at Listening 2 God, Prayer Ministries Network, and others that I will mention later.

Having said that, I cannot lay claim to the components of the term. The words “reasonable” and “mystic” have been around for a long time and it is their accepted content that will require me to justify my juxtaposing them as I have done.

The posts to this blog also go to my Google Group – reasonablemystic@googlegroups.com. “Dr David” posted the following comment to that group:

—————————————————————-
“because God cannot be logically proved without being experienced in relationship”

Spending time looking at this issue of “proof” and “relationship with God” can lead one to some interesting conclusions regarding being “prepared to be reasonable mystics”

It is not possible for me to recount in this reply decades of research along this avenue but I can make a few points. 1) the terms relationship, mystic and proof need definition 2) the links between the terms need clarification, and 3) the application of these concepts to humanity and well being need to be further expanded. I have attempted to do provide some material to address each of these points on my website www.SacredHealingNow.com

I think that any one on the path of the “reasonable mystic” is taking apath that few have traveled with widom and compassion.
—————————————————————-

Here is the gist of my reply:

Dr David, you might like to outline briefly how you believe your work relates to the subject of this group, keeping in mind its purpose. I quote from the group website “The visible trail of my journey from reluctant fundamentalism, through evangelical by conviction of Jesus as the only way, charismatic through encounter with the Holy Spirit, postmodern by choice, to protestant mystic as the only sensible response to the presence of God. ”

In the context of this group, and the blog that it is fed from, www.reasonablemystic.com, I would define a “reasonable mystic” to be one who seeks an intimate and experiential relationship with the Living Father God, with Son Jesus Christ, through the Holy Spirit, but who does not at the same time neglect clarity of reasoning and the expectation of learning more about who God truly is and how God relates to his children and the world.

By “relationship” I intend to include all aspects of how two or more beings may interact in ways that enrich each other and bring life rather than death.

I would not wish to separate the terms “reasonable” and “mystic” because then we are talking about something else entirely. For example, I am convinced that true “knowledge” is attained more through the spirit than the mind, whereas the mind is good at remembering, making connections and decisions, and initiating action. The two working together promote understanding. If we focus on the mind as the knowledge source then we are not considering mysticism but materialism and humanism. If, on the other hand, we neglect the mind in this relationship, we are into superstition and ultimately occultism.

However, we can gain much from studying both reason and mysticism in isolation (using both spirit and mind to do so, of course), while keeping clear in our minds that not everything said about either of these is necessarily life bringing.

Having said all of that, and it is necessarily superficial but I hope it gives the general drift, then I must say that I am convinced that such a true “reasonably mystical” relationship with God and the world can best be explored by interacing with and relating to the one true expression of God in the world – Jesus Christ. If God has deliberately revealed himself in this one, then is it reasonable to avoid him in our search? And, since the Holy Spirit, the Spirit of Jesus, is the presence of God in the world, and has been promised by God to indwell followers of Jesus, then surely the easiest way to get in touch with God is to interact with that Spirit, not some other spirit – human or otherwise.

In the light of this, I did a quick scan through the website you refered us to, Dr David, looking for the terms “God”, “Jesus”, “Christ”, and “Spirit”. There is much material on your site, and I have not been able to read it all. However, I was rather surpirised at the results of my search. I found references to a great many areas of investigation that I would be hestitant to embrace, having seen the mental, emotional and spiritual damage such experimentation caused to many of those troubled souls who come to us for ministry and healing. I found references to “God”, but in a fairly non-identifiable form as to who this “God” is. I found “Spiritual”, etc, but nothing that would point me to the Holy Spirit of God. And I did not find “Jesus”, or “Christ” or “Jesus Christ”, except in one or two quotes from other people.

Could I invite you to respond to the above so we can beter understand your position.

You must be wondering what happened to My Spiritual Journey, after more than a year! It hasn’t finished – I’ve just been rather busy doing it. More will come, I promise.

In the meantime, I’ve just begun reading Alister McGrath’s The Twilight of Atheism: The Rise and Fall of Disbelief in the Modern World.

What has atheism got to do with being a reasonable mystic, you might ask? Well, I discovered something interesting. For a long time I have heard atheists using the words of people like Voltaire and Descartes to bolster their cause. Now I discover that neither of them were atheists. In fact, they were deists. Not only that, but Descartes was actually trying to prove that God does exist, not the reverse!

Anyway, let’s go back one step so we can see what this has to do with this blog.

How many times have you heard someone say that Voltaire said God was an invention of man? They quote him as saying: “If God did not exist, it would be necessary to invent Him.” On page 25 McGrath gives this line along with the other four lines it belongs in:

If the heavens, stripped of their noble imprint,
Could ever cease to reveal Him,
If God did not exist, it would be necessary to invent Him,
Whom the sage proclaims, and whom kings adore.

In fact, Voltaire was as antagonistic to atheism as he was to the brand of Christianity exemplified by the corrupt hierarchy of the French Catholocism of his time. Far from wanting to remove Christianity, he actually wanted to remove this cancer that was forcing the loathed atheism to appear.

On pages 31 and 32 we meet Rene Descartes, famous for his “I think, therefore I am”. He was aware of the threat the new ideas of atheism were to Christianity, and with others set about trying to provide a philosophical proof that God did exist. Unfortunately, in order to make his “proofs” more palatible to his readers, who were more inclined towards science and natural reason than to religion, he decided to not make any appeal to experience of God. Of course, as this makes any such proof impossible, because God cannot be logically proved without being experienced in relationship, his efforts only succeeded in making the existence of such a hamstrung God seem even more unlikely.

The nail in the coffin came from the way other “Christians”, equally devoid of true experience of God, fought with each other in popular journals to demonstrate that their proof of God was better than anyone else’s proof. Atheism won by default, without hardly having to strike a blow.

So, it is clear that if they had realised the crucial need for experience of God as well as reason and understanding of his nature and ways – in other words, they had been prepared to be reasonable mystics – things could have turned out somewhat differently.