Article III. Meaning of the Terms of the Problem
The question of vocabulary presents one of the main difficulties encountered by those who study mystical problems. Many controversies arise on account of the lack of a previous agreement as to the meaning of the words used. For instance, in the question as to whether the mystical life is the normal crown of the interior life, the word “mystical” is understood by some in so broad a sense that the mystical life seems almost identified with a barely fervent Christian life, or with mere perseverance in the state of grace. Other authors use the word “mystical” in so limited a sense that there seems to be no mystical life without ecstasy, visions, and prophetic revelations. Likewise the word "contemplation” has for some a very broad sense, while for others it can be used only with the exact meaning of infused and passive contemplation. The same thing is true of the word “normal.” If used by speculative theologians, it is applicable only to a general and superior law of the life of grace, a law which in very diverse ways applies sooner or later, perfectly or imperfectly, to the development of generous souls that are called to the contemplative or even to the active life. And this law exacts many conditions that may be lacking; it will have difficulty in functioning in the person who receives the grace, for instance, in an unfavorable environment, in too absorbing a life of study, or where proper direction is lacking, or in the case of a person who has an un- grateful temperament and certain imperfections, even though they are involuntary. Despite all these obstacles, this laW governs the growth of the divine seed, a fact which the theologian considers and which experience proves. If, on the contrary, the word “normal” is used by a non-mystical director, seeing hardly anything but the particular phenomena and those from without, he gives the term “normal” a more concrete and material meaning, which seems to be contrary to fact when exceptions are noted. These exceptions he does not scrutinize from within that he may ascertain whether they proceed from grace itself or from the defects of the person receiving the grace, from the nature of the seed itself or from the effects of the barren soil which requires extraordinary labor for its transformation.
The same difficulty arises if we express the problem by ask ing whether all interior souls are called to the mystical life. Some who reply in the negative use the word “called” almost in the sense of “raised,” “led,” “predestined,” or “chosen”; and then it is clear that all interior souls are not called to the mystical life. This view ignores the statement of Scripture, “Many are called, but few are chosen.” These two words, "called” and “chosen,” differ greatly. On the other hand, some authors admit the general call of souls to the mystical life, but seem to forget the common teaching about the special signs of the individual call, signs that are not present in every pious soul. They are three in number and are enumerated by St. John of the Cross, and before him by Tauler. We will refer to them later on.1 The many consequent problems require a statement of the exact meaning of the word “call,” which may designate a remote or an immediate call. The same difficulty occurs in connection with the word “merit” in the question: Can a soul merit mystical contemplation?
We must try to establish precise meanings for the terms we are using. Although we would meet with difficulties in com- ing to an immediate agreement as to the real definitions, which express the basis of things and are the fruit of long research, yet we ought at least to have an understanding about nominal definitions, about the meaning of the principal terms of mystical theology in use today. Since mystical terminology was given precision by St. Teresa, St. John of the Cross, and St. Francis de Sales, we should take into account this established precision which rests on their authority and is a real progress. If, for example, since the days of these great masters, the expression “essentially mystical prayer” means manifestly passive prayer, we ought henceforth to use the expression only with this precise meaning, which includes many degrees of prayer.
With a view to fixing the vocabulary, we wish to propose some definitions, at least nominal ones,2 which are quite gen erally accepted by mystical theologians who follow simul taneously the doctrine of St. Thomas and that of St. John of the Cross, of St. Teresa, and of St. Francis de Sales. 3 In the course of this work, we will show the basic soundness of these definitions, or their real value.
St. Thomas defines contemplation as a simple intellectual view of the truth, superior to reasoning and accompanied by admiration. 4 It may be purely natural, as, for example, in an artist, a scholar, or a philosopher. Christian contemplation dwells on revealed truths and presupposes faith. Several theologians admit the existence of an acquired contemplation which follows upon meditation. They generally define this acquired contemplation as the loving knowledge of God which is the fruit of our personal activity aided by grace. On the contrary, infused contemplation, that which tire mystics speak s We mean especially the Carmelites Philip of the Blessed Trinity, Anthony of the Holy Ghost, and Joseph of the Holy Ghost, the Dominican Vallgornera, several Jesuit theologians, some Franciscans, and some members of other orders.
*Summa, Ha Ilae, q. 180, a.i, 6.
of, is a loving knowledge of God, which is not the fruit of human activity aided by grace, but of a special inspiration of the Holy Ghost; so that it is not producible at will, as is an act of faith.®
In the supernatural life, we understand by the word “ordinary” every grace, every act, every state, which is in the normal way of sanctity; all that is morally necessary in the majority of cases for attaining sanctity. And by “sanctity” we must, at the very least, understand that which is generally required to enter heaven immediately after death, because a soul suffers in purgatory only through its own fault. The “ordinary” thus defined comprises eminent graces that may be called extraordinary in point of fact because they are rather uncommon, but. that are ordinary according to the normal law if they are truly necessary for the attainment of sanctity, for the full perfection of Christian life, or for the complete purity of soul which merits immediate entrance into heaven.
Every favor, on the contrary, which is out of the normal way of sanctity and which is not at all necessary for its attainment, is extraordinary. We classify as such especially the graces called gratis datae, as miracles, prophecies, visions, and other phenomena of the same kind. 6
As regards the word “call” or “vocation,” we will attempt to distinguish in this work the different meanings it may have, according as it concerns a general and remote call of all just souls to mystical contemplation or, on the contrary, an individual and proximate call. As we shall see, this last may be merely sufficient and remain sterile; or it may be efficacious. In the latter case it may be an efficacious call either to lower degrees, or to higher degrees, of the mystical life.
In all these questions we must consider the full, normal development of the life of grace as such, and then see what it is in more or less well disposed souls which have received this
- Cf. infra, pp. 881-35. 8 Cf. infra, pp. 835-38.
germ of eternal life. To do this, we need to recall first of all the traditional doctrine of grace, such as it has been conceived, following St. Paul and St. Augustine, by the prince of theologians, St. Thomas Aquinas, and by the great Catholic mystics.
Footnotes
Chapter 4 of 31