Contemplation


                     The idea of contemplation is so intimately connected with that of mystical
                     theology that one cannot be clearly explained independent of the other; hence we
                     shall here set forth what mystical theology is.

                                        PRELIMINARY DEFINITIONS

                     Those supernatural acts or states which no effort or labour on our part can
                     succeed in producing, even in the slightest degree or for a single instant, are
                     called mystical. The making of an act of contrition and the reciting of a Hail Mary
                     are supernatural acts, but when one wishes to produce them grace is never
                     refused; hence they are not mystical acts. But to see one's guardian angel,
                     which does not in the least depend on one's own efforts, is a mystical act. To
                     have very ardent sentiments of Divine love is not, in itself, proof that one is in a
                     mystical state, because such love can be produced, at least feebly and for an
                     instant, by our own efforts. The preceding definition is equivalent to that given by
                     St. Teresa in the beginning of her second letter to Father Rodriquez Alvarez.
                     Mystical theology is the science that studies mystical states; it is above all a
                     science based on observation. Mystical theology is frequently confounded with
                     ascetic theology; the latter, however, treats of the virtues. Ascetical writers
                     discuss also the subject of prayer, but they confine themselves to prayer that is
                     not mystical.

                     Mystical states are called, first, supernatural or infused, by which we mean
                     manifestly supernatural or infused; secondly, extraordinary, indicating that the
                     intellect operates in new way, one which our efforts cannot bring about; thirdly,
                     passive, to show that the soul receives something and is conscious of receiving
                     it. The exact term would be passivo-active, since our activity responds to this
                     reception just as it does in the exercise of our bodily senses. By way of
                     distinction ordinary prayer is called active. The word mystical has been much
                     abused. It has at length come to be applied to all religious sentiments that are
                     somewhat ardent and, indeed, even to simple poetic sentiments. The foregoing
                     definition gives the restricted and theological sense of the word.

                     Ordinary prayer and acquired contemplation

                     First of all, a word as to ordinary prayer, which comprises these four degrees:

                        1.vocal prayer;
                        2.meditation, also called methodical prayer, or prayer of reflection, in which
                          may be included meditative reading;
                        3.affective prayer;
                        4.prayer of simplicity, or of simple gaze.

                     Only the last two degrees (also called prayers of the heart) will be considered, as
                     they border on the mystical states.

                     Mental prayer in which the affective acts are numerous, and which consists
                     much more largely of them than of reflections and reasoning, is called affective.
                     Prayer of simplicity is mental prayer in which, first, reasoning is largely replaced
                     by intuition; second, affections and resolutions, though not absent, are only
                     slightly varied and expressed in a few words. To say that the multiplicity of acts
                     has entirely disappeared would be a harmful exaggeration, for they are only
                     notably diminished. In both of these states, but especially in the second, there is
                     one dominant thought or sentiment which recurs constantly and easily (although
                     with little or no development) amid many other thoughts, beneficial or otherwise.
                     This main thought is not continuous but keeps returning frequently and
                     spontaneously. A like fact may be observed in the natural order. The mother who
                     watches over the cradle of her child thinks lovingly of him and does so without
                     reflection and amid interruptions. These prayers differ from meditation only as
                     greater from lesser and are applied to the same subjects. Nevertheless the
                     prayer of simplicity often has a tendency to simplify itself, even respect to its
                     object. It leads one to think chiefly of God and of His presence, but in a confused
                     manner. This particular state, which is nearer than others to the mystical states,
                     is called the prayer of amorous attention to God. Those who bring the charge of
                     idleness against these different states always have an exaggerated idea of them.
                     The prayer of simplicity is not to meditation what inactive is to action, though it
                     might appear to be at times, but what uniformity is to variety and intuition to
                     reasoning.

                     A soul is known to be called to one of these degrees when it succeeds therein,
                     and does so with ease, and when it derives profit from it. The call of God
                     becomes even clearer if this soul have first, a persistent attraction to this kind of
                     prayer; second, a want of facility and distaste for meditation. Three rules of
                     conduct for those who show these signs are admitted by all authors:

                          When, during prayer, one feels neither a relish nor facility for certain acts
                          one should not force oneself to produce them, but be content with affective
                          prayer or the prayer of simplicity (which, by hypothesis, can succeed); to
                          do otherwise would be to thwart Divine action.
                          If, on the contrary, during prayer, one feels the facility for certain acts, one
                          should yield to this inclination instead of obstinately striving to remain
                          immovable like the Quietists. Indeed, even the full use of our faculties is
                          not superfluous in helping us to reach God.
                          Outside of prayer, properly so called, one should profit on all occasions
                          either to get instruction or to arouse the will and thus make up what
                          prayer itself may lack.

                     Many texts relative to the prayer of simplicity are found in the works of St. Jane
                     de Chantal, who, together with St. Francis of Sales, founded the Order of the
                     Visitation. She complained of the opposition that many well-disposed minds
                     offered to this kind of prayer. By ancient writers the prayer of simplicity is called
                     acquired, active, or ordinary contemplation. St. Alphonsus Liguori, echoing his
                     predecessors, defines it thus: "At the end of a certain time ordinary meditation
                     produces what is called acquired contemplation, which consists in seeing at a
                     simple glance the truths which could previously be discovered only through
                     prolonged discourse" (Homo apostolicus, Appendix I, No. 7).

                     Higher contemplation

                     To distinguish it from acquired contemplation mystical union is called intuitive,
                     passive, extraordinary, or higher contemplation. St. Teresa designates it simply
                     as contemplation, without any qualification. Mystical graces may be divided into
                     two groups, according to the nature of the object contemplated. The states of the
                     first group are characterized by the fact that it is God, and God only, who
                     manifests Himself; these are called mystical union. In the second group the
                     manifestation is of a created object, as, for example, when one beholds the
                     humanity of Christ or an angel or a future event, etc. These are visions (of created
                     things) and revelations. To these belong miraculous bodily phenomena which are
                     sometimes observed in ecstatics.

                     There are four degrees or stages of mystical union. They are here taken just as
                     St. Teresa has described them with the greatest clearness in her "Life" and
                     principally in her "Interior Castle":

                        1.incomplete mystical union, or the prayer of quiet (from the Latin quies,
                          quiet; which expresses the impression experienced in this state);
                        2.the full, or semi-ecstatic, union, which St. Teresa sometimes calls the
                          prayer of union (in her "Life" she also makes use of the term entire union,
                          entera unión, ch. xvii);
                        3.ecstatic union, or ecstasy; and
                        4.transforming or deifying union, or spiritual marriage (properly) of the soul
                          with God.

                     The first three are states of the same grace, viz. the weak, medium, and the
                     energetic. It will be seen that the transforming union differs from these
                     specifically and not merely in intensity.

                     Mystical union

                     The preceding ideas may be more precisely stated by indicated the easily
                     discernible lines of demarcation. Mystical union will be called

                          spiritual quiet when the Divine action is still too weak to prevent
                          distractions: in a word, when the imagination still retains a certain liberty;
                          full union when its strength is so great that the soul is fully occupied with
                          the Divine object, whilst, on the other hand, the senses continue to act
                          (under these conditions, by makeing a greater or less effort, one can
                          cease from prayer);
                          ecstasy when communications with the external world are severed or
                          nearly so (in this event one can no longer make voluntary movement nor
                          energy from the state at will).

                     Between these well-defined types there are imperceptible transitions as between
                     the colours blue, green, and yellow. Mystics use many other appellations:
                     silence, supernatural sleep, spiritual inebriation, etc. These are not real degrees,
                     but rather ways of being in the four preceding degrees. St. Teresa sometimes
                     designates the weak prayer of quiet as supernatural recollection.

                     Transforming union

                     As regards transforming union, or spiritual marriage, it is here sufficient to say
                     that it consists in the habitual consciousness of a mysterious grace which all
                     shall possess in heaven: the anticipation of the Divine nature. The soul is
                     conscious of the Divine assistance in its superior supernatural operations, those
                     of the intellect and the will. Spiritual marriage differs from spiritual espousals
                     inasmuch as the first of these states is permanent and the second only
                     transitory.

                                    CHARACTERS OF MYSTICAL UNION

                     The different states of mystical union possess twelve characters. The first two
                     are the most important; the first because it denotes the basis of this grace, the
                     other because it represents its physiognomy.

                     First character: The presence felt

                     (a) The real difference between mystical union and the recollection of ordinary
                     prayer is that, in the former, God is not satisfied with helping us to think of Him
                     and reminding us of that presence.

                     (b) However, in the lower degrees (spiritual quiet) God does this in a rather
                     obscure way. The more elevated the order of the union the clearer the
                     manifestation. The obscurity just mentioned is a source of interior suffering to
                     beginners. During the period of spiritual quiet they instinctively believe in the
                     preceding doctrine, but afterwards, because of their preconceived ideas, they
                     begin to reason and relapse into hesitation and the fear of going astray. The
                     remedy lies in providing them with a learned director or a book that treats these
                     matters clearly. By experimental knowledge it is understood that which comes
                     from the object itself and makes it known not only as possible but as existing,
                     and in such and such conditions. This is the case with mystical union: God is
                     therein perceived as well as conceived. Hence, in mystical union, we have
                     experimental knowledge of God and of His presence, but it does not at all follow
                     that this knowledge is of the same nature as the Beatific Vision. The angels, the
                     souls of the departed, and devils know one another experimentally but in an
                     inferior way to that in which God will be manifested to us in heaven. Theologians
                     express this principle by saying that it is a knowledge by impressed or intelligible
                     species.

                     Second character: Interior possession

                     (a) In states inferior to ecstasy one cannot say that he sees God, unless indeed
                     in exceptional cases. Nor is one instinctively led to use the word see.

                     (b) On the contrary, what constitutes the common basis of all the degrees of
                     mystical union is that the spiritual impression by which God manifests His
                     presence makes that presence felt in the way of an interior something with which
                     the soul is penetrated; it is a sensation of absorption, of fusion, of immersion.

                     (c) For the sake of greater clearness the sensation one experiences may be
                     designated as interior touch. This very clear expression of spiritual sensation is
                     used by Scaramelli (Directoire mystique, Tr. iii, no. 26) and had already been
                     resorted to by Father de la Reguera (Praxis theologiae mysticae, vol. I, no. 735).
                     The following comparison will aid us in forming an exact idea of the physiognomy
                     of mystical union. We may say that it is in a precisely similar way that we feel
                     the presence of our body when we remain perfectly immobile and close our eyes.
                     If we know that our body is present, it is not because we see it or have been told
                     of the fact. It is the result of a special sensation (coenaesthesis), an interior
                     impression, very simple and yet impossible to analyse. Thus it is that in mystical
                     union we feel God within us and in a very simple way. The soul absorbed in
                     mystical union that is not too elevated may be said to resemble a man placed
                     near one of his friends in an impenetrably dark place and in utter silence He
                     neither sees nor hears his friend whose hand he holds within his own, but
                     through means of touch, he feels his presence. He thus remains thinking of his
                     friend and loving him, although amid distractions.

                     The foregoing statements concerning the first two characters always appear
                     unquestionably true to those who have received mystical grace but, on the
                     contrary, they are often a source of amazement to the profane. For those who
                     will admit them, at least provisionally the difficulties of mystical union are
                     overcome and what is to follow will not be very mysterious.

                     The ten characters remaining are the consequences or concomitants of the first
                     two.

                     Third character

                     Mystical union cannot be produced at will. It is this character that was useful
                     above in defining all mystical states. It may also be added that these states
                     cannot be augmented nor their manner of being changed. By remaining immobile
                     and being content with interior acts of the will one cannot cause these graces to
                     cease. It will be seen farther on that the only means to this end lies in resuming
                     bodily activity.

                     Fourth character

                     The knowledge of God in mystical union is obscure and confused; hence the
                     expression to enter into Divine obscurity or into Divine darkness. In ecstasy one
                     has intellectual visions of the Divinity, and the loftier these become, the more
                     they surpass our understanding. Then is reached blinding contemplation, a
                     mixture of light and darkness. The great darkness is the name given tot he
                     contemplation of such Divine attributes are never shared by any creature, for
                     instance, infinity, eternity, immutability, etc.

                     Fifth character

                     Like all else that borders on the Divine nature this mode of communication is
                     only half comprehensible and it is called mystical because it indicates a
                     mystery. This character and the preceding one are a source of anxiety to
                     beginners, as they imagine that no state is Divine and certain unless they
                     understand it perfectly and without anyone's help.

                     Sixth character

                     In mystical union the contemplation of God is produced neither by reasoning nor
                     by the consideration of creatures nor still by interior images of the sensible order.
                     We have seen that it has an altogether different cause. In the natural state our
                     thinking is always accompanied by images, and it is the same in ordinary prayer,
                     because supernatural operations of an ordinary character resemble those of
                     nature. But in mystical contemplation a change takes place. St. John of the
                     Cross is constantly reverting to this point. It has been said that the acts of the
                     imagination are not the cause of the contemplation; however, they may at least
                     accompany it. Most frequently it is in distractions that the imagination manifests
                     itself, and St. Teresa declared that for this evil she found no remedy (Life, ch.
                     xvii). We shall designate as constitutive acts of mystical union those which
                     necessarily belong to this state, such as thinking of God, relishing Him and
                     loving Him; and by way of distinction we shall denote as additional acts such
                     acts, other than distractions, as are not proper to mystical union, that is to say,
                     are neither its cause nor its consequences. This term indicates that an addition,
                     whether voluntary or not, is made to Divine action. Thus, to recite a Hail Mary
                     during spiritual quiet or to give oneself up to a consideration of death would be to
                     perform additional acts, because they are not essential to the existence of
                     spiritual quiet. These definitions will prove useful later on. But even now they will
                     permit us to explain certain abbreviations of language, often indulged in by
                     mystics, of which many erroneous interpretations have been made,
                     misunderstanding having resulted from what was left unexpressed. Thus it has
                     been said: "Often in supernatural prayer there are no more acts"; or "One must
                     not fear therein to suppress all acts"; whereas what should have been said was
                     this: "There are no more additional acts". Taken literally, these abridged phrases
                     do not differ from those of the Quietists. St. Teresa was suddenly enlightened in
                     her way of perfection by reading in a book this phrase, though it is inaccurate: "In
                     spiritual quiet one can think of nothing" (Life, ch. xxiii). But others would not have
                     discerned the true value of the expression. In like manner it was said: "The will
                     only is united"; by which was meant that the mind adds no further reasoning and
                     that thenceforth it makes itself forgotten or else that it retains the liberty of
                     producing additional acts; then it seems as if it were not united. But in future
                     these expressions that require long explanations will be avoided.

                     Seventh character

                     There are continual fluctuations. Mystical union does not retain the same degree
                     of intensity for five minutes, buts its average intensity may be the same for a
                     notable length of time.

                     Eighth character

                     Mystical union demands much less labour than meditation, and the more
                     elevated the state the less the effort required, in ecstasy there being none
                     whatever. St. Teresa compares the soul that progresses in these states to a
                     gardener who takes less and less trouble to water his garden (Life, ch. xi). In the
                     prayer of quiet the labour does not consist in procuring the prayer itself; God
                     alone can give that, but first in combating distractions; second, in occasionally
                     producing additional acts; third, if the quiet be weak, in suppressing the ennui
                     caused by incomplete absorption which very often one is disinclined to perfect by
                     something else.

                     Ninth character

                     Mystical union is accompanied by sentiments of love, tranquillity, and pleasure.
                     In spiritual quiet these sentiments are not always very ardent although
                     sometimes the reverse is the case and there is spiritual jubilation and inebriation.

                     Tenth character

                     Mystical union is accompanied, and often in a very visible manner, by an impulse
                     towards the different virtues. This fact (which St. Teresa constantly repeats) is
                     the more sensible in proportion as the prayer is more elevated. In private, far from
                     leading to pride these graces always produce humility.

                     Eleventh character

                     Mystical union acts upon the body. This fact is evident in ecstasy (q.v.) and
                     enters into its definition. First, in this state the senses have little or no action;
                     second, the members of the body are usually motionless; third, respiration
                     almost ceases; fourth, vital heat seems to disappear, especially from the
                     extremities. In a word, all is as if the soul loses in vital force and motor activity all
                     that it gains on the side of Divine union. The law of continuity shows us that
                     these phenomena must occur, although in a lesser degree, in those states that
                     are inferior to ecstasy. At what moment do they begin? Often during spiritual
                     quiet, and this seems to be the case mainly with persons of weak temperament.
                     Since this spiritual quiet is somewhat opposed to bodily movements the latter
                     must react reciprocally in order to diminish this quiet. Experience confirms this
                     conjecture. If one begins to walk read, or look to right and left, one feels the
                     Divine action diminishing; therefore to resume bodily activity is a practical means
                     of ending the mystical union.

                     Twelfth character

                     Mystical union to some extent hinders the production of some interior acts
                     which, in ordinary prayer, could be produced at will. This is what is known as the
                     suspension of the powers of the soul. In ecstasy this fact is most evident and is
                     also experienced in actual quiet, one of those states inferior to ecstasy, being
                     one of the phenomena that have most occupied mystics and been the cause of
                     the greatest anxiety to beginners. Those acts which have been termed additional,
                     and which would likewise be voluntary, are what are hampered by this
                     suspension, hence it is usually an obstacle to vocal prayers and pious
                     reflections.

                     To sum up: as a general rule, the mystical state has a tendency to exclude all
                     that is foreign to it and especially whatever proceeds from our own assiduity, our
                     own effort. Sometimes, however, God makes exceptions. Concerning suspension
                     there are three rules of conduct identical with those already given for the prayer of
                     simplicity (see above). If a director suspects that a person has attained unto the
                     prayer of quiet he can most frequently decide the case by questioning him on the
                     twelve characters just enumerated.

                                      THE TWO NIGHTS OF THE SOUL

                     There is an intermediate state not yet mentioned, a frequent transition between
                     ordinary prayer and spiritual quiet. St. John of the Cross, who was the first to
                     describe it clearly, called it the night of sense or first night of the soul. If we abide
                     by appearances, that is to say, by what we immediately observe in ourselves,
                     this state is a prayer of simplicity but with characteristics, two especially, which
                     make it a thing apart. It is bitter, and it is almost solely upon God that the simple
                     gaze is incessantly riveted. Five elements are included in this distressing state:
                     there is first, an habitual aridity; second, an undeveloped, confused idea of God,
                     recurring with singular persistency and independently of the will; third, the sad
                     and constant need of a closer union with God; fourth, a continual action of God's
                     grace to detach us from all sensible things and impart a distaste for them,
                     whence the name, "night of sense" (the soul may struggle against this action of
                     grace); fifth, there is a hidden element which consists in this: God begins to
                     exercise over the soul the action characteristic of the prayer of quiet, but He
                     does it so gently that one may be unconscious of it. Hence it is spiritual quiet in
                     the latent, disguised state, and it is only by verifying the analogy of effects that
                     one comes to know it. St. John of the Cross speaks of the second night of the
                     soul as the night of the mind. It is nothing more than union of the mystical states
                     inferior to spiritual marriage but regarded as including the to spiritual marriage but
                     regarded as including the element of gloom and therefore as producing suffering.

                     We can now form a compact idea of the development of mystical union in the
                     soul. It is a tree the seed of which is first concealed in the earth and the roots
                     that are secretly put forth in darkness constitute the night of sense. Fro these a
                     frail stem springs up into the light and this is spiritual quiet. The tree grows and
                     becomes successively full union and ecstasy. Finally, in spiritual marriage it
                     attains the end of its development and then especially it bears flowers and fruit.
                     This harmony existing between the states of mystical union is a fact of
                     noteworthy importance.

                                REVELATIONS AND VISIONS (OF CREATURES)

                     There are three kinds of speech: exterior, which is received by the ear, and
                     interior, which is subdivided into imaginative and intellectual. The last is a
                     communication of thoughts without words.

                     There are three similar kinds of visions. Many details of these different graces will
                     be found in the works of St. Teresa. What are known as private and particular
                     revelations are those contained neither in the Bible nor in the deposit of Apostolic
                     tradition. The Church does not oblige us to believe in them, but it is prudent not
                     to reject them lightly when they are affirmed by saints. Nevertheless it is certain
                     that many saints were deceived and that their revelations contradict one another.
                     What follows will explain the reason of this. Revelations and visions are subject
                     to many illusions which shall be briefly set forth. First, like Jonas at Ninive, the
                     seer may regard as absolute a prediction that was only conditional, or commit
                     some other error in interpreting it. Second, when the vision represents a scene
                     from the life or Passion of Christ, historic accuracy is often only approximate;
                     otherwise God would lower Himself to the rank of a professor of history and
                     archeology. He wishes to sanctify the soul, not to satisfy our curiosity. The seer,
                     however, may believe that the reproduction is exact; hence the want of
                     agreement between revelations concerning the life of Jesus Christ. Third, during
                     the vision personal activity may be so mingled with the Divine action that
                     answers in the sense desired seemed to be received. In fact, during prayer vivid
                     imaginations may go so far as to produce revelations and visions out of whole
                     cloth without any evil intent. Fourth, sometimes, in his desire to explain it, the
                     seer afterwards unconsciously alters a genuine revelation. Fifth, amanuenses
                     and editors take deplorable liberties in revising, so that the text is not always
                     authentic. Some revelations are even absolutely false because: first, in
                     describing their prayer, certain persons lie most audaciously; second, amongst
                     those afflicted with neuropathy there are inventors who, in perfectly good faith,
                     imagine to be real facts things that have never occurred; third, the devil may to a
                     certain degree, counterfeit Divine visions; fourth, amongst writers there are
                     genuine forgers who are responsible for political prophecies, hence the profusion
                     of absurd predictions.

                     Illusions in the matter of revelations often have a serious consequence, as they
                     usually instigate to exterior acts, such as teaching a doctrine, propagating a new
                     devotion, prophesying, launching into an enterprise that entails expense. There
                     would be no evil to fear if these impulses came from God, but it is entirely
                     otherwise when they do not come from God, which is much more frequently the
                     case and is difficult of discernment. On the contrary there is naught to fear from
                     mystical union. It impels solely towards Divine love and the practice of solid
                     virtue. There would be equal security in the impossible supposition that the state
                     of prayer was only an imitation of mystical union, for then the tendencies would
                     be exactly the same. This supposition is called impossible because St. Teresa
                     and St. John of the Cross keep repeating that the devil cannot imitate nor even
                     understand mystical union. Neither can our mind and imagination reproduce the
                     combination of the twelve characters described above.

                     What has been said shows us the importance of not confounding mystical union
                     with revelations. Not only are these states of a different nature but they must also
                     be differently estimated. Because ignorant of this distinction many persons fall
                     into one of these two extremes: first, if they know the danger of revelations, they
                     extend their severe judgment to mystical union and thus turn certain souls from
                     an excellent path; second, if on the contrary, they are reasonably persuaded of
                     the security and tranquillity of mystical union, they wrongly extend this favourable
                     judgment to revelations and drive certain souls into a dangerous path.

                     When God so wills He can impart to him who receives a revelation the full
                     certainty that is real and wholly Divine. Otherwise one would not have had the
                     right to believe the Prophets of the Old Testament. Scripture ordained that they
                     distinguished from false prophets. For instance, the envoys of God performed
                     miracles or uttered prophecies the realization of which was verified. In order to
                     judge private revelations in a more or less probable way, two kinds of information
                     must be obtained. First, one should ascertain the qualities or defects, from a
                     natural, ascetic, or mystical point of view, of the person having revelations. When
                     the one in question has been canonized the investigation has already been made
                     by the Church. Second, one should be acquainted with the qualities and defects
                     of the revelation itself and with its various circumstances, favourable or otherwise.
                     To judge of ecstasies one should be actuated by the same principles, the two
                     chief points to settle being: first, in what the soul is absorbed whilst thus deprived
                     of the senses, and whether it is captivated by knowledge of a higher order and
                     transported by an immense love; second, what degree of virtue it possessed
                     before reaching this state and what great progress it made afterwards. If the
                     result of the investigation be favourable the probabilities are on the side of Divine
                     ecstasy, as neither the devil nor disease can work the imagination up to this
                     pitch.

                     There are several rules of conduct in connection with revelations but we shall give
                     only the two most important.

                     The first relates to the director. If the revelation or the vision has for its sole effect
                     the augmenting of the love of the seer for God, Christ, or the saints, nothing
                     prevents these facts from being provisionally considered Divine; but if, on the
                     contrary, the seer be impelled to certain undertakings or if he wish that his
                     prediction should be firmly believed, he should be told: "You must admit that you
                     cannot be believed simply upon your word, consequently give signs that your
                     revelations come from God and from Him alone." As a rule this request remains
                     unanswered. Note the prudence of the Church in regard to certain feasts of
                     devotions which she has instituted in consequence of private revelations. The
                     revelation was only the occasion of the measure taken. The Church declares that
                     such a devotion is reasonable but she does not guarantee the revelation that
                     suggested it.

                     The second rule concerns the seer. In the beginning, at least, he is gently to do
                     his utmost to repulse the revelations and to turn his thoughts away from them.
                     He is to accept them only after a prudent director will have decided that he may
                     place a certain amount of confidence n them. This doctrine, which seems severe,
                     is nevertheless taught forcibly by many saints, such as St. Ignatius (Acta SS.,
                     31 July, Préliminaires, no. 614), St. Philip Neri (ibid., 26 May, 2nd life, no. 375),
                     St. John of the Cross (Assent, Bk. II, ch. xi, xvi, xvii, and xxiv), St. Teresa, and
                     St. Alphonsus Ligouri (Homo Apost., Appendix I, no. 23), for the reason that
                     there is danger of illusions. With even greater reason, revelations and visions (of
                     created objects) should be neither desired nor requested. On the other hand,
                     many passages in St. Teresa and other mystics prove that mystical union may
                     be desired and asked for, provided it be done humbly and with resignation to
                     God's will. The reason is that this union has no disadvantages but presents great
                     advantages for sanctification (see THEOLOGY, under sub-title Mystical).

                     St. Teresa far excels all writers that preceded her on the subject of
                     contemplation. In their descriptions those prior to her confined themselves to
                     generalities. Exception must be made in favour of Blessed Angela de Foligno,
                     Ruysbroeck and the Venerable Marina d'Escobsar as regards the subject of
                     ecstasies. St. Teresa was likewise the first to give a clear, accurate, and detailed
                     classification. Before her time hardly anything was described except ecstasies
                     and revelations. The lower degrees required ore delicate observation than had
                     been devoted to them before her day. After St. Teresa the first place for careful
                     observation of these matters belongs to St. John of the Cross. But his
                     classifications are confused. St. Teresa and St. John of the Cross are also
                     greatly superior to subsequent authors who have been satisfied to repeat them,
                     with comments.

                     Aug.  Poulain
                     Transcribed by Christine J. Murray

                                       The Catholic Encyclopedia, Volume IV
                                    Copyright © 1908 by Robert Appleton Company
                                    Online Edition Copyright © 1999 by Kevin Knight
                                         Nihil Obstat. Remy Lafort, Censor
                                   Imprimatur. +John M. Farley, Archbishop of New York

The Catholic Encyclopedia:  newadvent.org

Meditations@the-River-Jordan.com