Skip to the text
Ember
PT

Chapter XIX. Controverted Questions *

  1. So far we have explained the doctrine commonly held by all Schools of spirituality, and our readers have no doubt been able to recognize that this teaching fully suffices to lead and raise souls to the highest degrees of perfection. God does not make growth in holiness dependent upon the solution of controverted questions. Now, however, we can afford to touch briefly upon the main points under discussion. This we shall do as zmpartially as possible, aiming not at making divergent opinions appear identical (which cannot be done), but at showing that the differences among the more moderate exponents of the various Schools are not as great as they may at first sight seem to be.

  2. Causes of these divergences. 1) The first cause, no doubt, is to be found in the very azficulty and obscurity of the matters at issue. It is not an easy task to look into the secret designs of God concerning the uzzversal call of all baptized persons to infused contemplation, or to determine the very zature of that mysterious act wherein God is the principal agent and wherein the soul is more passive than active, receiving light and love without forfeiting its freedom. It is not surprising then, that writers striving to understand these wonders do not always offer the same explanations.

  1. Another cause of the existing differences is the diversity of method employed. As we have said (n. 28), all Schools strive to combine the two methods, the erperzmental and the deductive; but, whilst some employ chiefly the former, others rely more on the latter. Hence the differences in the conclusions reached: the former, impressed by the sizall number of contemplatives, will say that not all are called to contemplation; the latter, seeing that we all possess a supernatural organism adequate for the attainment of contemplation, will conclude that if there are not many contemplatives, it is because there are not many generous souls ready to make the sacrifices demanded by contemplation.1
    1. This divergence of opinion is further accentuated by temperament, education and actual occupation. Some persons are better fitted for contemplation than others, and when this natural aptitude is further developed by education and occupation, or by manner of life, one is naturally inclined to think that contemplation is the normal thing. There are others of a more active disposition, whose temperament and occupation are rather obstacles to contemplation, and who are therefore readily led to believe that contemplation is an extraordinary state.
  1. Moreover, it must not be forgotten that the philosophical and theological systems which one may have adopted concerning knowledge and love, efficacious and _ sufficient grace, make their influence felt in mystical theology. If, for instance, one admits with the Thomists that grace is intrinsically efficacious, one is more inclined to consider the passive state a continuation of the active state, since even in the latter one acts under efficacious motions of grace.

We should not be astonished at these divergent opinions in matters of so delicate a nature; we are free to choose the system which in our judgment has the more solid foundation.

The points of present-day discussion may be reduced to these three: 1° the zazure of infused contemplation; 2° the untversal call thereto; 3° the xormal tine at which it begins.

§ I. Controversy regarding the nature of contemplation

  1. All admit that zx/wsed or mystic contemplation is a free gift of God, Who places us in the passive state and gives us a knowledge and a love of Himself which we have but to accept. But in what does this knowledge consist? It is evidentally not identical with the knowledge which comes from the light of faith, for everyone admits that it is an experimental or quast-experimental knowledge (n. 1394). But does this knowledge come adrectly and zimmediately, that is, without any intermediary, or zuadtrectly and mediately, that is, through acquired or infused ideas? Two answers have been given to this question.

  2. 1°The theory of immediate knowledge. ‘This theory, which claims the authority of Pseudo- Dionysius, of the School of St. Victor, and the Flemish School of Mysticism, maintains that infused contemplation is a perception or an zntuction or a atrect viston of God, although obscure and vague. Being direct, it differs from the ordinary know- ledge given by faith, and being obscure, it differs from the Beatific Vision. There are slight differences in the various expositions of this theory.

Father Poulain, basing his explanation upon the theory of the sA777tual senses, thinks that the contemplative soul /ee/s directly the presence of God. “ During the union, when it is not too exalted, we are like a man placed beside one of his friends, in complete darkness and silence. He does not see him, therefore; he does not Acar him; he only /ee/s that he is there by the sense of touch, because he holds his hand in his own. And so he continues to think and to love him.” #

  1. Father Marechal, having ascertained that mystics affirm the existence of an intellectual intuition of Code and of the Indivisible Trinity during moments of exalted contemplation, is of the opinion “that in high contemplation a new element is involved, distinct in quality from normal activities and from ordinary grace... the active, not symbolic, presentation of God to the soul, with its corresponding psychology : the direct intuition of God by the soul.” ? This, he adds, does not seem strange if one admits (as he previously explains) that the intuition of being is, so to speak, the center of perspective in human psychology.

This theory is completed by Father Picard.3 After explaining that from a zatural point of view the direct, but vague and obscure apprehension or intuition of God is not impossible once one has demonstrated by the traditional proofs the fact of His existence, he applies this theory to mystic contemplation. That same God, Whose living presence makes itself felt in the depths of the soul “sometimes takes possession of it by focusing its cognitive faculties upon Himself in silence, in wonder and in peace; at other times by seizing upon its will and its affections... When this seizure of the soul is felt rather by the cognitive faculties, we have the prayer of recollection; when by the volitional and emotional faculties, we have the prayer of quiet.” The author then goes on to show that in proportion as God tightens His hold, as He takes a more absolute, a more exclusive and a more extensive control, the soul advances to the higher degrees of contemplation.

Father Picard concludes by saying that this theory difers vastly from Ontologism, for it affirms that the wotéon of being has its origin in the perception of finite being; that it is analogous, and can be applied to God only after a demonstration of His existence. He rejects the theory that we see on earth all things in the essence of God. It is, he says, our own finite and imperfect intellect with the sole aid of its own finite and imperfect ideas and acts which perceives all the truths of which it has any knowledge. Moreover, he speaks of an intuition which is essentially vague and obscure.

  1. 2° The theory of mediate knowledge. The opinion commonly accepted is that the knowledge of the contemplative, howsoever perfect it may be, is medzate and at the same time vague and obscure, although it is guaszexperimental, In the first degrees of contemplation God2 contents Himself with projecting His light, the light of the Gifts, upon the ideas already possessed, either by attracting attention to an idea in a way that is calculated to make a deep impression, or by making the mind draw from two premises some striking conclusion (n. 1390). In the higher states, as in the ecstatic union, God zzfuses new zdeas which represent divine truths much more clearly and impressively than do naturally acquired concepts. It is now that the soul is enraptured at perceiving truths which it had never known before. And since the soul lives these truths and really relishes them, it acquires of them a guast-experimental knowledge. This knowledge is still within the realms of faith, but it is much more vzvzd and above all much more affectionate than ordinary knowledge, from which it is distinguished by the fact that it is God-given, and that the soul receiving it receives both knowledge and love, and has only to consent to the divine action which produces in it these priceless gifts.

  2. We adopt this view, which we have already exposed in the second chapter of this book. It seems to preserve better the essential difference between contemplation and the Beatific Vision, the former remaining medzate and obscure,“ as through a glass in a dark manner,” the latter being dzrect and clear. However, we are careful to refrain from making charges of Ontologism against those who maintain as probable the opinion of a direct intuition, so long as they stress its vague and obscure character and reject the basic principle of Ontologism by asserting that the intellect does not reach God except through creatures. !

It is true that many mystics make use of bold expressions which at first sight seem to imply that they are in direct contact with the Divine Substance and that they see God; still, when we examine the context, we find that these words must be understood of the efects produced in the soul by the divine action.? Through the gift of wisdom one is made to relish the love, the joy, the spiritual peace which God infuses into the soul : hence the name of d@vine delights given by St. Teresa to the prayer of quiet. Through the a@vine touches, mystics seem to feel the very substance of their soul moved, so deep is the impression produced by divine love. But the descriptions they give us of these34 impressions can all be referred to the different effects of an ardent and generous love. It may be said therefore that if they use expressions which appear too strong, it is due to the inadequacy of human language for describing the effects of grace produced in their soul.

§ II. Universal call to contemplation

  1. It is not question here of the zmdzv¢dual and proximate call to infused contemplation of which we spoke in number 1406. On this point every one accepts the doctrine of Tauler and of St. John of the Cross, What is meant is the remotely sufficient and general call; in other words, we ask whether af souls in the state of grace are remotely and sufficiently called to infused contemplation. Once more we meet with two very different answers which flow, to a great extent at least, from the different views held concerning contemplation.

  2. 1° A universal call, remote and sufficient, is today admitted with slight variations by a great number of writers belonging to different Religious Orders, such as the Dominicans, 1 the Benedictines, 2 the Franciscans,3 the Carmelites,5 the Jesuits, 5 the Eudists,® as well as by a number of secular priests.7 Various Reviews, notably /a Vie Spirituelle, have been published in order to defend and propagate this opinion. Father Garrigou-Lagrange vigorously expounds it when he strives to prove that the mystical life is the xormal development of the interior life and that consequently all souls in the state of grace are called thereto. We give a brief summary of his arguments.

a) The fundamental principle of the mystic life is the very same as that of the ordinary, interior life, that is, sanctifying grace or the grace of the virtues and the gifts. These gifts increase with charity, and, once they have attained their full development, they act in us according to their supra-human mode of action and put us in the passzve or mystic state. Hence, the principle of the interior life contains in germ the mystic life, which is here below the flowering, as it were, of the spiritual life.

  1. b) The purification of the soul as it advances in the interior life is not completed except through the fasszve trials. Now, these t Fathers Arintero, Garrigou-Lagrange, Joret, Janvier, etc.

2 Dom Louismet, Dom Huyben, etc. — 3 Father Ludovic de Besse. ey

4 Father Theodore of St. Joseph, Essai sur l'oraison selon l’école carmélitaine, 1923. — Note his restrictions contained on, p. 128.

5 L. Peeters, Vers l’unton divine par les Exercices de S, Ignace, 1924.

© Father Lamballe, La Contemplation.

7 Father Saudreau, L’Ami du Clergé, etc,

IBY CHAPTER IV.

purifications or trials are of a mystical nature. Hence, the interior life cannot attain its full development in any other way than through the mystic life.

€) The evd of the interior life is the same as that of the mystic life, that is, a perfect disposition for the reception of the light of glory immediately after death. “Now, the perfect disposition for the reception of the beatific vision immediately after death can be none other than the zz/ense charity of a soul thoroughly purified and possessed of an ardent desire of seeing God, such as we find in the mystic union, and particularly in the transforming union. The latter is therefore the highest development here below of the life of grace.” *

  1. 2° Theory ofa special and restricted call. The foregoing arguments do not appear convincing to all, and a great number of spiritual writers belonging to the Society of Jesus, such as Cardinal Billot, Fathers Maumigny, Poulain, Bainvel, J. de Guibert, and to the Discalced Carmelites, such as Father Mary Joseph of the Sacred Heart, and others outside these two Schools of thought, such as Mer. Lejeune and Mer. Farges, think that acquired contemplation is a free gift which ts not bestowed upon all, and which moreover is mot necessary for the attainment of sanctity. Their arguments are these: 2 a) The theory of a universal call is indeed constructed along superb theological lines, but all of the structure is not equally solid. It has xot deen proved, for instance, “ that the seven gifts correspond to seven adistznct infused habits and not to seven kinds of graces for the reception of which the intellect and the will are prepared by a single habit. Moreover, even were this demonstrated, one would still need to prove that the gifts of wisdom and understanding can function perfectly only during contemplation and not during the reception of enlightening graces which do not necessarily include this particular form of prayer. Such demonstration has never been made.6

Nor has it been proved that the gifts a/ways act in a supra-human way. Cardinal Billot4 thinks that they act in two ways, now in an ordinary manner, accommodating themselves to our human mode of action, now in an extraordinary way by producing in us infused contemplation.

  1. b) No doubt, the passzve trials seem to be the more focent means of purifying the soul, since they make the soul pass through a veritable purgatory; but in this vale of tears, where the occasions for
  • These arguments are expounded by P. R. DE MAUMIGNY, Practice of mental Prayer, t. 1], P. V; MGR. FARGES, Mystical Phenomena, P. 1, C. 1V; Controv. de fa Presse, C. \V; J. DE GUIBERT, Rev, d'Asc. et de Mystique, Janv. 1924, p. 25-32.

suffering and mortification are so numerous, is it not possible to effect this purification by a sweet resignation to the will of God and by positive acts of mortification performed under the inspiration of the Holy Ghost and the guidance of a prudent director? Has it been demonstrated that the graces of contemplation are the only choice graces of God? Every one admits that there are persons who have not yet been raised to infused contemplation and who are more perfect than others whom God has freely brought thereto precisely in order to make them become holy (n. 1407). And since they are more perfect, they are by that fact more thoroughly purified. It may well be therefore, that at the moment of death their purification is complete.

@) It is indeed true that the end of the interior life as well as that of the mystic life is to prepare for the beatific vision, and that the transforming union is for certain souls the best preparation for it. But is this the oly preparation? There are persons continuing in discursive and affective prayer who are models of heroic virtue, who are outwardly, and in the estimation of those who know them well, just as virtuous as some contemplatives, or even more so. Has it been shown conclusively that the gifts of the Holy Ghost have no part in the thousand ejaculatory prayers offered up by many persons while performing their daily occupations? Has it been proved that the said gifts exert no influence on the constant and supernatural performance of professional duties, which by the very fact that they are so constant, require heroic courage? And yet, when one questions these persons, one finds no signs of contemplation properly so-called. Must we not then admit that God, Who knows how to adapt His graces to the character, training and circumstances of each individual, does not lead all souls by the same way, and that although He demands of all a perfect docility to the inspirations of the Holy Ghost, He makes use of different means to sanctify them?

  1. 3° While weighing the arguments advanced by both sides of the controversy, it seems to us that the two opinions are not so far apart as they may appear.

A) Let us first of all examine the points on which the moderate exponents of either view agree:

a) There have been and there are contemplatives of every temperament and of every condition of life, still, in point of fact, there are temperaments and modes of life which /exd themselves better to infused contemplation. The reason for this is that contemplation is a free gift bestowed by God when and on whom He pleases (n. 1387), and that moreover God is wont to adapt His graces to the temperament and the duties of state of each individual.

b) Contemplation is not sanctity, but only one of the most effective means of attaining it. Sanctity really consists in charity, in intimate and habitual union with God, Now, although contemplation is 2% ztse/f the highway to this union, it is o¢ the only way. There are indeed persons who are not contemplatives “who are more advanced in virtue, in true charity, than others who have already received infused contemplation. ”7

c) We have all received in Baptism a supernatural organism (habitual grace, the virtues and the gifts) which, when it attains its full development, leads xormally to contemplation in the sense that it imparts that docelzty which permits God to put us in the passive state when He pleases and in the way He pleases. But as a matter of fact, there are souls who through no fault of theirs never attain to contemplation here below.8

  1. B) Despite agreement upon these important points, there remain azvergences which proceed, in our opinion, from tendencies more or less favorable to the mystical state and from the more or less extraordinary character attributed to that state. We shall in all modesty offer our solution in two assertions: a) Infused contemplation considered zz z¢se/f is a normal development of the Christian life. b) / potnt of fact, however, not all souls in the state of grace seem to be called to such contemplation inclusive of the transforming union.

a) Infused contemplation when considered independently of the extraordinary mystical phenomena which attend it, is not of a miraculous or of an abnormal nature; it is simply the resultant of two causes: the cu/t:vation of our supernatural organism, especially of the gifts of the Holy Ghost (n. 1355), and of a speczal grace which of itself has nothing of the miraculous about it. We said that the infusion of new tdeas is not necessary for the first degrees of contemplation (n. 1390). We might even assert with the Carmelite Congress of Madrid that 27 ztse/f contemplation is the most perfect state of union between the soul and God that can be had in this life, the highest ideal and, as it were, the last stage of the Christian life in this world for souls called to mystic union with God, the ordinary way of sanctity and of habitual heroic virtue.9 This seems indeed to be the traditional teaching as found in the mystic writers from Clement of Alexandria to St. Francis de Sales.

  1. b) However, z¢ does not necessarily follow from these premises that all souls in the state of grace are truly called, even in a remote way, to the ¢ransforming union. Just as in heaven there are different degrees of glory, “for star differeth from star in glory,” t so there are on earth different degrees of sanctity to which souls are called. Now, God, Who is ever free in the distribution of His gifts, and Who knows how to adapt His action to the temperament, education and manner of life of each individual, can raise souls by divers ways to the heights of holiness to which He destines them.

To those who by their more active character and their more absorbing occupations seem to be made for action, He gives graces especially suited to the exercise of the active gifts. Such persons live in intimate, habitual union with God; at times they even multiply their ejaculatory prayers beyond what seems possible to human power. Above all else they perform out of love for God, and with heroic constancy and docility to the inspirations of grace, the thousand and one little duties of daily life. Thus, they reach the degree of sanctity to which God destines them, and this without the help (at least habitual) of infused contemplation. They are in the simple unitive way, such as we have described it (n. 1303 and foll.).

No doubt, one might say that such persons are excepiions and that the zzormal way to sanctity is contemplation.? Still, when such exceptions are 7umerous, must one not take account of them in the problem of a remote call, since temperament and duties of state are elements which aid in deciding the question of vocation?

At bottom, the agreement of these authors is more real than the difference of language would seem to indicate, Some, viewing the matter in an abstract and formal way, admit numerous exceptions to the universal call while maintaining the principle of its universality; others, taking a more practical view, prefer to say simply that the call is not universal albeit that contemplation is the normal development of the Christian life.

  1. c) The solution we propose is, it seems, dased on traditional teaching. 1) On the one hand, well-nigh all the spiritual writers, from Clement of Alexandria to St. Francis de Sales, speak of contemplation as the normal consummation of the spiritual life. 3 2) On the other hand, rather few10 of them explicitly examine the question of a universal call to contemplation. Those that do so have in mind most of the time choice souls living in contemplative communities, or at least, very fervent souls, When, therefore, they assert that all or nearly all can arrive at the fountain of living waters (contemplation), it is for the members of their communities that they speak, and not for all souls in the state of grace. Besides, from the seventeenth century on, from which time greater precision of language began to prevail in these matters, a great number of writers require for infused contemplation a sfeczal call, and many positively assert that one can arrive at sanctity without contemplation. *

The two questions are therefore not to be confounded, for one can admit that contemplation is the normal development of the spiritual life without affirming that all souls in the state of grace are called to the transforming union.

  1. Let us add that the attainment of sanctity and the direction of the souls tending thereto do not depend upon the solution of such a difficult problem. By insisting upon the cultivation of the gifts of the Holy Ghost as well as upon perfect detachment from self and from creatures, by gradually leading souls to the prayer of simplicity, by teaching them to listen to the voice of God and to follow His inspirations, one places them in the way that leads to contemplation; the rest belongs to God, Who alone can lay hold of these souls, and, according to St. Teresa’s graceful metaphor, place them in the nest, that is to say, in the contemplative repose.

  2. With most authors we think that infused contemplation belongs to the unitive way. Of course, there are exceptional cases in which God raises less perfect souls to contemplation, precisely with the intent of perfecting them more effectively (n. 1407). This is not however what He ordinarily does.

Still, there are writers of note, such as Father Garrigou- Lagrange, who refer the purification of the senses and the

SAUDREAU, La vie d'union a Dieu, Ed. 3. 1921; GARRIGOU-LAGRANGE, of. cit., t. II, p. 662-740; POURRAT, Christian Spirituality. However, a critico-historical study of these documents from the special point of view of the zzz¢versal call to contemplation is still wanting.

« This seems to be the solution of Dom V. LEHODEY, Ways of Mental Prayer, P. III, C. XIII; Le saint Abandon, P. III, ch. XIV; of MGR WAFFELAERT, R. A. M., janv. 1923, p. 31, and in his various works; of the Carmelite School, and of those writers who admit a state of acguzred contemplation, no matter how brief. It is similar to the solution given by P. M. DE LA TAILLE, L'oradson contemplative, as well as to that proposed by M. J. MARITAIN, Vie Spzrztuelle, mars 1923, and appearing in the work of GARRIGOU-LAGRANGE, t. II, p. (§8-71).

prayer of quiet to the illuminative way. They take their stand on the authority of St. John of the Cross, who in the Dark Night writes :“ The night of sense is common, and the lot of many : these are the beginners...'. The soul began to set out on the way of the spirit, the way of frofictents, which is also called the z//umznative way, or the way of ¢zfused contem- Plation, wherein God Himself teaches and refreshes the soul.” 2 We have been fora long time acquainted with this text, but like H. Hoornaert, 3 who has translated the works of the great mystic, we find in it quite a different meaning. In his various works, St. John of the Cross speaks only of infused contemplation ; now, as regards this contemplation there are beginners, proficients and perfect souls : for him, the degznners are those who are about to enter into the fasszve purtjication of the senses : this is why he speaks of them from the very first chapter of the Dark Night. By the proficzents he means those who have entered upon infused contemplation, guzetude and full union. The perfect are those who have gone through the night of the spirit and are in the ecstatic or in the transforming union. This is an altogether different point of view.

  1. Furthermore, since we are writing a text-book, it is important to bring together and compare all that relates to the various kinds of contemplation, in order to bring out more clearly its nature and divers degrees. This is why we thought we should keep to the plan commonly followed. But we hasten to add that God, Whose ways are as manifold as they are wonderful, does not always follow the logical lines we strive to trace. It is therefore important that the spiritual director follow and not anticipate the motions of divine grace.

  2. Hence, we conclude with these words of L’ Amz du Clergé: “What is so energetically discussed in theory does not prevent certitude regarding a goodly number of essential practical rules... In order to profit by the medicinal qualities of a plant, it is not absolutely necessary to know its history and nomenclature. The same may be said of contemplation : there is no agreement concerning its definition or its place in theological classifications... Without waiting for technical and theoretical conclusions, directors are quite able to distinguish the goal towards which generous and predestined souls turn their steps, and to help them reach it.” 4

  • Dark Night, Bk. I, C, VIII. — ? /ozd., C. XIV. 3 Note sur la Wut obscure, p. 5-6. — 48 dec. 1g2t, p. 697.

CONCLUSION OF BOOK III: SPIRITUAL DIRECTION ‘OF CONTEMPLATIVES

In several places of this book we have laid down rules for the direction of contemplatives; however, it may be well to give a resume of them here and to point out what course the spiritual director should follow in order to prepare souls for contemplation, to guzde them through its dangers, and to lift them up if they falter in the way.

  1. 1° It is the duty of the director, if he has in his care generous souls, to prepare them little by little for the unitive way and for contemplation. He must avoid two extremes : that of urging zdiscriminately and too hastily all fervent souls to contemplation, and that of not being concerned at all about this matter.

  2. A) In order to avoid the first mistake, a) the spiritual director should remember that one cannot ordinarily aim at contemplation until one has for a long time exercised oneself in prayer and in the practice of the Christian virtues of purity of heart, detachment from self and from creatures, humility, obedience, conformity to the Will of God, the spirit of faith, of trust and of love.

He should call to mind the teaching of St. Bernard : * If among the monks there are any contemplatives, they are not the novices in virtue, who but erstwhile dead to sin, labour in tears and in the dread of judgment in order to heal their as yet fresh wounds. They are rather those who after a long co-operation with grace have made solid progress in virtue, who need no longer revolve again and again in their minds the sorrowful picture of their sins, but, on the contrary, find their delight in meditating day and night and in keeping the law of God.

b) Should the director notice that the desire of contemplation is excessive and even presumptuous, he must seek to restrain it, recalling that no one can force his way into contemplation, and that moreover the joys of prayer generally come only after bitter trials.

e@) He must carefully guard against mistaking the semsible consolations of beginners, or even the sfzvz¢wal ones of advanced souls for the divine delights (n. 1439), and he should wait, before passing judgment on the entrance of a soul into the passive state, for the three distinct signs which we indicated in numbers 1413-1416.

  1. B) In order to avoid the second error, he should remember that God, ever prodigal of His gifts, gives Himself generously to fervent and docile souls.

a) Without speaking explicitly about contemplation, he should exercise these good souls not only in virtue, but also

*/n Cantica sermo LVII, n, 11. We have given a summary of his thought.

in devotion to the Holy Ghost. He should frequently speak to them of the indwelling of that Divine Spirit in the human soul, of the duty of thinking often of Him, of adoring Him, of obeying His inspirations, of cultivating His gifts.

b) He must teach them to make their prayer more and more affective, to prolong the acts of religion, of love, of self-offering, of self-abandonment to the Will of God, and to repeat these acts frequently during the course of the day by a "simple elevation of the heart without in any way neglecting duties of state or the exercise of virtue. When he notices that they are inclined to remain in silence in the presence of God in order to listen to Him and to do His bidding, he must encourage them by extolling this practice as excellent and exceedingly fruitful.

  1. 2° Once the soul has entered into the mystic ways, the director will need the greatest prudence in order to be a faithful guide amidst the arzdi/zes and the divine delights.

A) He must lend his help during the passzve trials so that the soul may be able to fight off discouragement and the other temptations of which we spoke in numbers 1432-1434.

B) In sweet contemplation, the sou! may be exposed to spiritual gluttony and to vain-complacency.

a) In order to avoid the first of these defects, it is important ever to remember that we must love the God of consolations rather than the consolations of God, that consolations are only a means to unite us to Him, and that we must be ready to renounce them completely the moment it pleases God to withdraw them : God alone sufficeth.

b) Sometimes God Himself undertakes to curb the impulses of pride by vividly impressing upon the soul a sense of its nothingness and its miseries, and by showing clearly that His favors are pure gifts in which we can in no way ” glory. As long as souls have not been completely purified through the night of the spirit, they need, as St. Teresa says, to be exercised in humility and in conformity to the Will of God (n. 1447, 1474). Above all, they must be warned against the desire of visions, revelations and other extraordinary phenomena. We are never permitted to desire these, and the Saints went so far as to repel them by acts of humility (n. 1496).

  1. C) We must not forget that ecstasy is but an illusion if, to use the expression of St. Francis de Sales, it is unrelated to ecstatic manner of life, that is to say, to the practice of heroic virtue (n. 1461). It would be a serious mistake to neglect our duties of state in order to give more time to contemplation. Father Balthazar Alvarez, confessor to St. Teresa, distinctly declared that one must relinquish contemplation in order to fulfil one’s duties or to minister to the neighbor’s needs, and that God bestows upon him who thus learns to mortify himself more light and

740 BOOK III. — CONCLUSION.

more love in one hour of prayer than He gives to. others during several hours. *

  1. D) It would be a still greater mistake to imagine that contemplation confers the. privilege of impeccability. History shows that false mystics, like the Beghards and the Quietists, who thought themselves impeccable, fell into the grossest vices. St. Teresa insists constantly upon the necessity of watchfulness in order to avoid sin, even after the highest degrees of contemplation have been reached, and St. Philip Neri was used to say : “My God, beware of Philip, or he will betray Thee.” Indeed we can not persevere for long without a special grace, and this grace is given to the humble who know how to distrust themselves and to place all their confidence in God.

  2. 32° We must therefore realize that contemplative souls can fall into sin. Such falls may come from several causes :

a) The soul may have been raised to contemplation before it had sufficiently mastered its passions. Instead of courageously keeping up the fight, it lulled itself to sleep in the sweetness of repose. Then violent temptations arose, and the soul, trusting overmuch in its own strength, fell a victim to sin. The means of restoration are compunction of heart, return to God with a contrite and humbled heart, and long and laborious penance. ‘The greater the heights from which one has fallen, the more humble and constant must be the efforts to take up the long and arduous climb once more. It is the office of the director to drive home this truth with kindness but also with firmness.

b) There are contemplatives who fought valiantly and successfuily to bring their evil tendencies into subjection. But imagining that the struggle was over, they relaxed their efforts and became less generous in fulfilling certain duties which they looked upon as less important. Indifference gradually set in and finally begot lukewarmness. Now, the director must check this downward movement by reminding them that the more generous God has been with them, the more they must increase their fervor, that the least negligence on the part of God’s friends hurts to the quick Him Who bestows His favors so freely upon them. One should read St. Margaret Mary’s autobiography in which she relates the severe reproaches Our Lord addressed to her in order to correct her smallest infidelities, her lack of respect and attention during the Office and during mental prayer, her lack of uprightness and purity of intention, her vain curiosity, her least failings in obedience, even when these latter were due to an attempt to increase her austerities. This reading should move the director to work energetically for the return of such souls to fervor.

  1. ec) Other souls expected to find only sweetness and divine delights in contemplation, once the first passive trials were over. But in reality God continues to send them t Vie by P. Dupont, ch, XIII, ch. XLI, 5¢ difficulté, alternately desolation and consolation, so as to sanctify them all the more effectively. They give way to discouragement and thus lay themselves open to laxity and its consequences. The director should teach them to apply the great remedy, love for the Cross. Not that the Cross is in itself lovable, but because it renders us more conformable to Jesus Crucified.

The sainted Curé of Ars used to say : “The cross is the gift which God makes to His friends. The love of crosses must be asked for. Then they become sweet. I have tried it... O, I had plenty of crosses; I almost had more than I could bear! I began to ask for a love of crosses; then I became happy... Truly, there is no happiness except there,” *

One word may sum up the duty of the spiritual director towards contemplatives : to study the works and the biographies of the mystics, and to beg for the gift of counsel, so as never to address these souls without having previously consulted the Holy Ghost.

Footnotes

  1. SAUDREAU, L’ Etat mystique, ch. IX, XI, XIV et appendices; POULAIN, Graces of Intertor Prayer ; MGR. LEJEUNE, art. Contemplation in Dict, de Théol. ; MGR. IARGES, Phénom. mystiques et Controv. de la Presse; JORET, La Contemplation mystique; GARRIGOU-LAGRANGE, Perfect. et contemplation. ↩

  2. Graces of Interior Prayer, C. VI, n. 16. 2 La Mystique chrétienne, in Rev. de Philosophie, 1912, t. XXX, p. 478, 3 La sazsie immédiate de Dieu dans les tats meystiques, 1923. ↩

  3. Such an accusation would be particularly unjust with regard to those who like Mer. FARGES, (Mystical Phenomena, and, Réponses aux Controverses) admit that from its very first stages contemplation is effected through zzfused ¢deas, and who call it direct simply because the impressed idea is not that zwh7ch 7s seen, nor even that wherein one sees, but that whereby or through which the ¢hing ztself zs seen. This opinion is subject to criticism, but it is not open to charges of Ontologism. ↩

  4. In order to appreciate better this manner of speaking, one should read the passages gathered together by Father POULAIN, Graces of Interior Prayer, C. V-VI, as well as the interpretations of these passages giyen first by himself, and then in quite a different sense by Father SAUDREAU, L'Elat muystigue, Appendice II. ↩

  5. De Virtutibus tnfusis, th. VIII, ↩

  6. J. DE GUIBERT, Joc. czt., p. 26. ↩

  7. GARRIGOU-LAGRANGE, of. cét¢., t. II, p. [78]. ↩

  8. ‘This may proceed not only from an unfavorable envircnment, but from a want of direction, as well as from natural temperament. On this point it is well to recall with J. Maritain that, according to many Thomists, such as Bannez, John of St. Thomas, the Carmelites of Salamanca, the very temperament of the Elect is in a sense an effect of predestination." GARRIGOU-LAGRANGE, of. Cit, t. II, p. [75]. ↩

  9. Carmelite Congress, 1923, Theme V. — The Congress avoided pronouncing on the question of the universal call to contemplation, because, no doubt, it looked upon this matter as doubtful. ↩

  10. f, Cor., XV, 41. — 2 GARRIGOU-LAGRANGE, of. czt., t. II, p. (71-79). 3 Abundant documents can be found in the following works : HONORE DE STE MARIE, Jvadztion des Peres et des auteurs eccléstastiques sur la contemplation, ↩

Chapter 23 of 24