Mysticism

Northclare

Who is your favorite Christian Mystic ?
And why ?

Onesimus

St.John of the Cross. I guess it is because of his Eastern influence in his writings on getting to know and love God but also to understand ourselves too and our imperfections that keep us from getting closer to Jesus. I recommend reading ''Dark night of the soul'' and ''ascent of mount Carmel''.

His expression of theology kind of differs a little to the western one such as St.Ignatius of Loyola, ( who I also love by the way ) with his encourgement to use imagination when praying to Jesus and so on. I guess that these imaginings can invite unwanted attention in prayer and can decieve a soul greatly if not done under spiritual direction that is.

Good question by the way. Can I only name one? Others would be St.Anthony the great, St.Francis of Assisi and Russian Orthodox saint Seraphim of Sarov.

Snappy Smurf

Tell me Onesimus, is Dark Night a hard read? I had a copy of it but never got round to really reading it, although I did try.

My favourite mystic would be St. John of the Cross too. What little I have read has inspired me.

Onesimus

No it is not a hard read provided you get the right translation that is.

In say that, reading it is easy, understanding most of it, not so easy.

Most current translators of his work find it hard to depart from the old english but still do an excellent job. So my advice is to get a copy of a current translation. Reading his original translated works can be a bit like reading St.Augustines works ( apart from his confessions ) which can be difficult to read and you'd find yourself having to re-read a sentence or two ( which is not a bad idea lol ).

But also reading the Philokalia volumes 1 to 4 is something I recommend whilst reading St.John of the Cross as you'll see where I am going with the eastern influences. There are 5 volumes but the 5th is still being translated from the Greek.

The first volume goes from 4th to 9th century ( pre-schism ) and then volume II is after the schism of the East. I read many Orthodox eastern saints works even after the schism on prayer. Their advice is amazing as well as the advice from the west.

Another mystic I love is ''Thomas a Kempis'' work ''The Imitations of Christ''. This book is like gold to me. He is a German Mystical Monk of the Roman rite. Very Holy man.

Snappy Smurf

Onesimus wrote: »

No it is not a hard read provided you get the right translation that is.

In say that, reading it is easy, understanding most of it, not so easy.

Most current translators of his work find it hard to depart from the old english but still do an excellent job. So my advice is to get a copy of a current translation. Reading his original translated works can be a bit like reading St.Augustines works ( apart from his confessions ) which can be difficult to read and you'd find yourself having to re-read a sentence or two ( which is not a bad idea lol ).

But also reading the Philokalia volumes 1 to 4 is something I recommend whilst reading St.John of the Cross as you'll see where I am going with the eastern influences. There are 5 volumes but the 5th is still being translated from the Greek.

The first volume goes from 4th to 9th century ( pre-schism ) and then volume II is after the schism of the East. I read many Orthodox eastern saints works even after the schism on prayer. Their advice is amazing as well as the advice from the west.

Another mystic I love is ''Thomas a Kempis'' work ''The Imitations of Christ''. This book is like gold to me. He is a German Mystical Monk of the Roman rite. Very Holy man.

Cool. I love Imitation, but I am ashamed to say I have not read the whole thing. Shocking I know. I must rectify that soon. But I have a little book on the spirituality of St. Therese, the Little Flower, which is excellent - she is one of my favourites too. I was pleased to hear that she said she wrote about God as she wished she felt, whereas before I thought she's awfully sickly sweet. But to hear she was a real person with real struggles I can identify with, that is something.

Onesimus

Snappy Smurf wrote: »

Cool. I love Imitation, but I am ashamed to say I have not read the whole thing. Shocking I know. I must rectify that soon. But I have a little book on the spirituality of St. Therese, the Little Flower, which is excellent - she is one of my favourites too. I was pleased to hear that she said she wrote about God as she wished she felt, whereas before I thought she's awfully sickly sweet. But to hear she was a real person with real struggles I can identify with, that is something.

I can see how looking for a Saint we can identify with can be comforting to say the least. But I think it's more important to look for a Saint who will truly challenge us to change our lives. No doubt St.Therese, the little flower ( whom my wife loves by the way ) does that in her writings, but at the same time just thought I'd share that thought.

Thomas a Kempis you will find was refused Sainthood. Basically on the grounds that he was accidently buried alive and they found dirt under his fingernails which would indicate he tried to escape. That's madness and I hope they open the case soon because A) who, after being buried alive by dirt would not be found to have dirt underneath their fingernails ? and Christ teaches us to value life and it was not like he was dying a martyrs death. It was an accident for crying out loud, just lying there and accepting death would be suicide. So with that in mind and much centuries later I hope they re-open his cause for Sainthood soon.

Snappy Smurf

Onesimus wrote: »

I can see how looking for a Saint we can identify with can be comforting to say the least. But I think it's more important to look for a Saint who will truly challenge us to change our lives. No doubt St.Therese, the little flower ( whom my wife loves by the way ) does that in her writings, but at the same time just thought I'd share that thought.

Thomas a Kempis you will find was refused Sainthood. Basically on the grounds that he was accidently buried alive and they found dirt under his fingernails which would indicate he tried to escape. That's madness and I hope they open the case soon because A) who, after being buried alive by dirt would not be found to have dirt underneath their fingernails ? and Christ teaches us to value life and it was not like he was dying a martyrs death. It was an accident for crying out loud, just lying there and accepting death would be suicide. So with that in mind and much centuries later I hope they re-open his cause for Sainthood soon.

I like the balance of the sweet love of St. Therese and the tough love of Thomas. I need both.

Northclare

St Theresa of Avila appeals to me.

For some reason unknown to me I have read the Bible alright,but the Mystics seem to open the veil within the holy writings.

John Moriarty often mentioned, John of the cross,Meistir Eckhart,St Teresa of Avila and Bishop Berkley.

I also think John Moriarty may be become a saint.

philologos

I'm much more a fan of revelation than mysticism.

georgieporgy

The trouble with mystics is there are too many to choose from. And then there is the issue of false mystics. So the untrained novice needs a good guide when choosing.

I think Teresa of Avila and John of the Cross provide a good foundation but wouldn't describe them as a nice light read!

Therese of Liseux, much easier and more modern, is a must read for everybody.

I also like Anne Catherine Emmerich. (and I'd probably call her my favourite)

Northclare

Georgieporgy

I don't agree with
"The trouble with Mystics".

Your straight in there with a negative affirmation.

Are you talking about Christian mysticism as a whole ?

I also like Sufi mysticism.

One mystic might suit your beliefs,another would suit mine.

There's more than one way to find God.

I don't affiliate myself with any church,denomination or religious organizations.

But I appreciate Christian Mysticism and were all on a journey.

georgieporgy

Northclare wrote: »

Georgieporgy

I don't agree with
"The trouble with Mystics".

Your straight in there with a negative affirmation.

Are you talking about Christian mysticism as a whole ?

I also like Sufi mysticism.

One mystic might suit your beliefs,another would suit mine.

There's more than one way to find God.

I don't affiliate myself with any church,denomination or religious organizations.

But I appreciate Christian Mysticism and were all on a journey.

I meant it in a positive fashion, like "too much of a good thing" "spoilt for choice". Like a lady in a handbag store.

qrrgprgua

philologos wrote: »

I'm much more a fan of revelation than mysticism.

Do you think God stopped with Christ and his apostles or do you think that people over the ages have been used by God to reveal his love to humanity?

St. Paul says: "Do not extinguish the Spirit. Do not despise prophecy. Test everything; retain what is good".

Onesimus

Snappy Smurf wrote: »

I like the balance of the sweet love of St. Therese and the tough love of Thomas. I need both.

Yes you're right. God approaches each and every mystic differently and all have their different kind of fruit to offer each and every one of us.

Lets not forget St.Faustina either.

When I think about it, most of the Western mystics are women. Goes to show how much Christ loves his brides who love him. It's also worth noting that not one of these clever women ever wrote or proclaimed their desire for women to be priests. They knew what equality was and were closer to God than we would ever be.

Let's pray the women of today who desire such things will look to these women as an example.

totus tuus

St. Padre Pio, St Therese of Lisieux, and St. Rita of Casia are among my favourite mystics, they are a great inspiration to those who suffer either spiritually or physically!

Onesimus

philologos wrote: »

I'm much more a fan of revelation than mysticism.

Then what are you doing in this thread then if that is the case?:rolleyes:

philologos

Onesimus wrote: »

Then what are you doing in this thread then if that is the case?:rolleyes:

I guess what's worth asking is what is Christian mysticism?

Or should we pursue what is Biblical first.

georgieporgy

Lydwine of Schiedam, Catherine of Siena, Cure d'Ars, Fr Paul of Moll, Joseph of Copertino, Dominic Savio,Anna-Maria Taigi, etc etc.

Life is too short! From age 30 to 40 I read 100 biographies and felt I had only touched the surface. When you consider the Communion of Saints you realise the movie ET is true. We are not alone!

OP- mystics are basically people in an advanced state of prayer. All canonised saints can be considered mystics for a start. But those are just the ones we know about.

BUT... watch out for the pretend mystic who might lead you to the cliffs of moher instead of God

georgieporgy

Onesimus wrote: »

Then what are you doing in this thread then if that is the case?:rolleyes:

John Henry Newman was not always a catholic.

georgieporgy

edit.....

Onesimus

I guess what's worth asking is what is Christian mysticism?

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=Christian+Mysticism

Or should we pursue what is Biblical first.

If you like you could do that and find a lot of mystics in there too OT and NT.

Onesimus

georgieporgy wrote: »

John Henry Newman was not always a catholic.

huh? What is it you are trying to say? Philly said he was more of a fan of revelation ( the scriptures ) than he was of Mysticism. He is not interested in any kind of Christian mysticism so I had to scratch my head for a bit and reply the way I did with my question.

georgieporgy

philologos wrote: »

Or should we pursue what is Biblical first.

Yes we should. But notice how many mystics you encounter there. For example Peter leaving Rome meets Jesus on the Appian Way and casually asks "where are you off to, boy" (taking liberties in prose), and Jesus replies "going to Rome to get crucified again, seeing as you won't do it for me". Jesus was safely in Heaven at this stage and here he was asking someone to go and do something (works v faith alone argument??.... I digress))

St John the Evangelist was the most mystical of the four I would say. People are still trying to figure out the Book of Revalation.

Not sure where I'm going with this except to suggest that I think one thing leads to another, but you are right to keep your antennas up.

georgieporgy

Onesimus wrote: »

huh? What is it you are trying to say? Philly said he was more of a fan of revelation ( the scriptures ) than he was of Mysticism. He is not interested in any kind of Christian mysticism so I had to scratch my head for a bit and reply the way I did with my question.

philologos is not a catholic yet (whisper )

philologos

qrrgprgua wrote: »

Do you think God stopped with Christ and his apostles or do you think that people over the ages have been used by God to reveal his love to humanity?

I don't believe that there will be any further revelation which fundamentally adds to anything we've already received in Jesus Christ.

There's a thing called Christian experience, certainly, but there are no profound truths that will be found outside of the Bible that will teach us anything fundamentally about God that cannot be found in its pages. Things we experience might reaffirm what are revealed truths.

georgieporgy: Paul and Peter encountered the Lord Jesus, through His revealed word to them. Yes, they have Christian experience, but we all do, and we can definitely learn from the examples of others in Scripture, but first and foremost in terms of how God has shown Himself to us and to commit ourselves to a new and lasting relationship with Him through the grace of Jesus dying for sin once and for all.

Slav

Northclare wrote: »

Who is your favorite Christian Mystic ?
And why ?

Gregory Palamas for giving Christian mysticism theological and philosophical explanation.

Slav

philologos wrote: »

I'm much more a fan of revelation than mysticism.

What do you understand by revelation?

georgieporgy

philologos wrote: »

I don't believe that there will be any further revelation which fundamentally adds to anything we've already received in Jesus Christ.

There's a thing called Christian experience, certainly, but there are no profound truths that will be found outside of the Bible that will teach us anything fundamentally about God that cannot be found in its pages. Things we experience might reaffirm what are revealed truths.

Absolutely right. That would be the catholic viewpoint too.

however, just to move the story along, say if you had a friend who was a more knowledgeable/experienced christian than you, he may be able to help you with advice; that is how we view mystics. They went before us and show us the way.

Northclare

I have read the Holy Books such as the Bible and Koran.
It's the Mystics of Christianity and Islam who appeal to me more.
The mystics and their spiritual progress and growth are living proof that the prayer,meditation,and a hermit lifestyle helped them to get closer to God.

It's the preacher/pastors who openly admit they have the "answers" they scare me...
I have tried listening to Biblical bigotry and Bible thumpers, it might work for the reformed Addict or the Naive telpis....
But it's the sheer control and endless arrogance of the thumpers that doesn't appeal to me.

The mystics seem to share their experience strength and hope.....

philologos

Northclare wrote: »

I have read the Holy Books such as the Bible and Koran.
It's the Mystics of Christianity and Islam who appeal to me more.
The mystics and their spiritual progress and growth are living proof that the prayer,meditation,and a hermit lifestyle helped them to get closer to God.

It's the preacher/pastors who openly admit they have the "answers" they scare me...
I have tried listening to Biblical bigotry and Bible thumpers, it might work for the reformed Addict or the Naive telpis....
But it's the sheer control and endless arrogance of the thumpers that doesn't appeal to me.

The mystics seem to share their experience strength and hope.....

That's the problem. You pick and choose what you want to believe. However, if something is true, and if something is real, then picking and choosing what you believe is just a pacifier as we go through life. It may give a temporal comfort, but it is nothing to do with truth.

Rather than give me any Christian mystic, give me Jesus Christ on the cross crucified, and that will give me enough to contemplate for a lifetime. I would rather study and know the living words of God rather than dwell on the writings of some men which may or may not be true.

What if you read a mystic that you might like, and the Bible clearly teaches against what they are saying, do you stick with the mystic?

Do you see my point?

philologos

georgieporgy wrote: »

Absolutely right. That would be the catholic viewpoint too.

however, just to move the story along, say if you had a friend who was a more knowledgeable/experienced christian than you, he may be able to help you with advice; that is how we view mystics. They went before us and show us the way.

I'm not sure if I would call that the same thing as mysticism. I'm reluctant of even using that word due to its connotations.

I've had lots of great advice from friends, about how to read the Bible, about prayer and other things, particularly as I was making my first steps towards Christ. However, to take a position like Northclare does is a little dangerous IMO.

georgieporgy wrote:

philologos is not a catholic yet (whisper )

I probably won't be either. I'm too convinced that the Reformers brought back the forgotten theology of the early church and brought Biblical teaching back into Europe.

Northclare

Philologos is everything ok,your not making any sense with your truth.

Is it the King James Bible or the Catholic Bible your referring to ?

Is it not good that mysticism helps out people like me understand the depths that people have to go to, to find God.

I'm a deep thinking person,your probably the opposite.

All you talk about is this truth.

There's a God out there and in here and your not God

philologos

Northclare wrote: »

Philologos is everything ok,your not making any sense with your truth.

Is it the King James Bible or the Catholic Bible your referring to ?

Everything is good, yes. You know things are good with me when I'm discussing what's Biblical. The day that I stop posting about it, that'll be a sad day

Any translation will do. I read the ESV. There's no radical differences.

Northclare wrote: »

Is it not good that mysticism helps out people like me understand the depths that people have to go to, to find God.

I'm a deep thinking person,your probably the opposite.

Completely wrong. I would also see myself as a deep thinking person.

The Bible provides good satisfaction for a deep thinking person. I advocate reading other Christian texts, as secondary to the Bible, and if you are going to read them, you should check what they say is Biblical.

By the by, at university I studied philosophy with my other subject and thoroughly enjoyed it.

Northclare wrote: »

All you talk about is this truth.

There's a God out there and in here and your not God

1) I never claimed I was God.
2) Why shouldn't we talk about truth?
3) Yes, there is a God out there, which is why we should look to His inspired word.

Northclare

Good for you

Snappy Smurf

Philo, Christian mystics ain't nuffink to be afraid of. All they are is people who loved God intensely and wrote about it. If we read their writings we can be inspired by these saints.

I'd leave Islam out of it. This thread is about Christian mysticism, i.e. those who acknowledge and love Jesus Christ as the Incarnate Word of God. Islamists do not accept this.

Northclare

The Sufism Mystics are fine,I know Christians who like reading about all types of mysticism.

Leave Islam alone,they deserve respect if your a real Christian you wouldn't have problems with the people of that religion, and the Atheists are ok too there's lots of good people who are not Christians or believers.

Yes this is a Christian forum but Christians love everyone

Snappy Smurf

Northclare wrote: »

Leave Islam alone,they deserve respect if your a real Christian you wouldn't have problems with the people of that religion, and the Atheists are ok too there's lots of good people who are not Christians or believers.

Yes this is a Christian forum but Christians love everyone

Did I show 'disrespect' to Islam?

Am I not a real Christian?

Do I have a 'problem' with Islam?

Do I have a problem with Islamic people?

Do I not 'love everyone'?

These are the kinds of questions that keep me awake at night.

Northclare

I know I know I sometimes get things mixed up,we can never leave out Islam.
I like Sufism
I just like the depth of Mysticism.

Does anyone like John Donoghue s books ?

qrrgprgua

philologos wrote: »

Rather than give me any Christian mystic, give me Jesus Christ on the cross crucified, and that will give me enough to contemplate for a lifetime. I would rather study and know the living words of God rather than dwell on the writings of some men which may or may not be true.

Its what Catholics also believe. You don't need to follow or believe in mystics and apparitions. They don't make faith any truer or add to it. After all the devil can also quote scripture.. so not all people who experience mysticism are experiencing God.

However Christ did not leave the world.. He is living and is among us..

philologos

Northclare wrote: »

The Sufism Mystics are fine,I know Christians who like reading about all types of mysticism.

Leave Islam alone,they deserve respect if your a real Christian you wouldn't have problems with the people of that religion, and the Atheists are ok too there's lots of good people who are not Christians or believers.

Yes this is a Christian forum but Christians love everyone

Yes, Christians do share the love of Christ with all people.

The love of Christ means that we tell people about what Christianity. Not everything can be true, and as a result A and NOT A can't be both true.

For example, I can't believe simultaneously that Jesus Christ was crucified and resurrected to rescue us from our sinful nature before God, and believe that Jesus was merely a prophet, not crucified, not resurrected and didn't come to rescue us from our sinful nature before God.

You get what I'm saying?

qrrgprgua wrote: »

Its what Catholics also believe. You don't need to follow or believe in mystics and apparitions. They don't make faith any truer or add to it. After all the devil can also quote scripture.. so not all people who experience mysticism are experiencing God.

However Christ did not leave the world.. He is living and is among us..

I'm not arguing that Christ isn't living and active.

Snappy Smurf

philologos wrote: »

I'm not sure if I would call that the same thing as mysticism. I'm reluctant of even using that word due to its connotations.

I've had lots of great advice from friends, about how to read the Bible, about prayer and other things, particularly as I was making my first steps towards Christ. However, to take a position like Northclare does is a little dangerous IMO.

I probably won't be either. I'm too convinced that the Reformers brought back the forgotten theology of the early church and brought Biblical teaching back into Europe.

Phil, look at the dict. defin. of mysticism:

Belief that union with or absorption into the Deity or the absolute, or the spiritual apprehension of knowledge inaccessible to the intellect, may be attained through contemplation and self-surrender.

I think you are thinking of non-Christian mysticism, magic and the like, such as Mystic Meg. But that is not what Christian mysticism is about at all. Mysticism is really nothing more than a deep, living, and personal relationship with God.

chozometroid

qrrgprgua wrote: »

However Christ did not leave the world.. He is living and is among us..

What exactly do you mean by this statement? Are you referring to the Holy Spirit?