Mysticism

views updated

MYSTICISM

A term used to cover a literally bewildering variety of states of mind. Perhaps the most useful definition is that given by Jean gerson: "Theologia mystica est experimentalis cognitio habita de Deo per amoris unitivi complexum" (Mystical theology is knowledge of God by experience, arrived at through the embrace of unifying love). There are three points to notice: (1) the use of the term mystical theology (which was traditional in the Church until comparatively modern times) associates the mystical state with, while distinguishing it from, natural theology, which enables man to arrive at some knowledge of God by natural reason: also from dogmatic theology, which treats of the knowledge of God arrived at by revelation. (2) We do come to know God through mystical theology. (3) This knowledge is obtained not by intellectual processes but by the more direct experience implied in the term "unifying love."

Non-Christian mysticism. This article is concerned primarily with Catholic mysticism, but it is necessary to recognize that Catholics and Christians in general have no monopoly on mysticism. Indeed, every religious tradition has its mystical aspect, and we cannot do adequate justice to the subject of Catholic mysticism without seeing something of the background from which it sprang. Just as in the realm of Biblical scholarship, exegetes have come to recognize that we cannot isolate the Jewish experience from the larger context of Egyptian and Babylonian religion, so we have to see the whole development of Christian mysticism in the light of a common human striving.

Thus, within the remote world of China an early teaching maintained that man's highest purpose was the quest of Dao (see daoism), which was regarded as the Ultimate Reality, source of all that is, pervading and harmonizing all natural phenomena. Hence, for man, Dao is the exemplar of conduct and man can find himself only by some kind of identification with it.

The process by which this identification is achieved bears a remarkable resemblance to the traditional teaching of Christian mysticism. First comes a process of purgation. In the words of laozi: "Only one who is eternally free from earthly passions can apprehend the spiritual essence of Dao. " After this stage comes the condition in which the achievement of virtue is not a self-conscious, self-regarding effort but rather a connatural state. The final stage is reached when harmony with Dao is fully realized. In this condition, man is the unresisting vehicle of Dao, so that he is able to rise above the limitations of matter and the laws of the physical universe.

On the other hand, it must be insisted that in much Chinese speculation, especially in the writings of Laozi, there is no idea of "religion" as we understand the term, no sense of a personal relationship with God, or of obligations to him. In fact, the end of the mystical way for the Daoist might well seem to be an absorption into some pantheistic system (see pantheism). It is hardly surprising that, to all intents and purposes, Daoism became amalgamated with buddhism.

Of hinduism it is unnecessary to speak here, except to mention the possible influence that Indian ideas had on the Greek tradition through Pythagoras, and hence on Plato and neoplatonism. Neoplatonic influence on the Christian tradition through plotinus and proclus is undeniable. It was recognized that nothing made life more worth living than to look upon Beauty, not just in its partial and imperfect realizations, but in itself.

There is a kind of universal tradition embracing a metaphysics "that recognizes a divine reality, substantial to the world of things and lives and minds; and a psychology that finds in the soul something similar or even identical with divine reality; and an ethic that places man's final end in the imminent and transcendent Ground of all being." (See A. Huxley, The Perennial Philosophy, introduction.)

Is mystical experience open to all? Yet, if the foregoing were true, the problem at once arises, why is the recognition of this universal reality so partial and fragmentary? What is it about the mystics that enables them to pierce through the veil that conceals from so many others the essential truth and goodness and beauty of God Himself? In the words of one of the mystics quoted by Huxley (ibid. ):

O my God, how does it happen in this poor world that thou art so great and yet nobody finds thee, that thou callest so loudly and nobody hears thee, that thou art so near and nobody feels thee, that thou givest thyself to everybody and nobody knows thy name? Men flee from thee and say they cannot find thee; they turn their backs on thee and say they cannot see thee; they stop their ears and say they cannot hear thee.

There has been much debate whether the full mystical experience is possible for all men or whether it is open only to those of a certain temperament. Dom Cuthbert Butler, a recognized authority, argued that the traditional Christian view, which had been lost to sight during the 18th and 19th centuries, is that all men are called to a specifically mystical way of knowing and loving God. In favor of this view he quoted Bishop John Hedley, who argued that contemplation is the chief act of the heart of man, for the heart flowers in the act of charity, and contemplation is charity that is actual, pure, and flowering under the movement of the Holy Spirit. It differs from ordinary prayer, yet is not extraordinary in the sense that humble souls cannot aspire to it. It is not a miraculous activity, but is simply the perfection of supernatural prayer, ordinarily given by God to those who remove obstacles to it and avail themselves of the requisite means.

R. Garrigou-Lagrange protested against the view that there are two ways of perfection: an ordinary way, intended for all, and an extraordinary one of prayer and mystical life, to which all fervent souls are not called by God. On the contrary, there is only one unitive way, not of its nature extraordinary, to which, by docility to the Holy Spirit, generous souls are led to perfection. Nevertheless, it must be acknowledged that because of a lack of proper guidance or because of other unfavorable circumstances, or because particular individuals are strongly inclined to exterior activities, some generous souls may not arrive at the mystic life during the span of an ordinary lifetime. This, however, Garrigou-Lagrange considered to be accidental.

Accidental or not, Abbot Butler recognized the situation to be so common that, through no fault of the individual concerned, the circumstances of life may, and often do, render the experience of mystical union all but impossible. He cited St. Gregory's complaint that by becoming pope he had lost the gift of contemplation he had enjoyed in the monastery, and concluded there is much to be said for the view that there are not one or two "unitive ways" but many, just as there are many mansions in our Father's house.

One of the problems raised by much mystical literature is that far too many authors seem anxious to achieve a basic classification of states into which, like some bed of Procrustes, the diversified experiences of a whole host of highly individualized personalities must be made to fit. The all but infinite variety of physiological conditions, intellectual endowments, social background, educational equipment, and the like, render it unlikely a priori that the way to God will be precisely the same even for any two persons, let alone for a whole mass of people. It seems desirable, therefore, to maintain flexibility of mind in trying to evaluate the accounts that different mystics give of their experiences, even while we recognize that, as the fundamental qualities of human nature remain unchanged, so there is likely to be a rough parallelism between any two sets of experience.

The role of grace. Certainly an absolutely essential starting point for all is the desire to arrive at whatever the goal may be and a consequent willingness to undertake whatever steps may be required to attain that goal. Yet even this starting point itself implies some faint recognition of what the goal is. "You would not be looking for me if you had not found me," as Pascal expressed it. Already the process of turning away from what is not God in order to come to God has begun; already God is "drawing" the soul to Himself. It is here that we begin to encounter what is probably the crucial problem in any discussion of mysticism—the cooperation between the soul and God. This is, of course, only a specialized form of a larger problem (see grace and nature), but it calls for particular treatment here.

Without going into the question of the possibility of genuine mystical experiences for those who do not belong in any external sense to Christianity (though the modern view tends to be that such grace may be more widely available than was once thought), all Christian writers agree that where genuine mystical experiences occur they are the direct result not of any efforts of the mystics themselves but of a special grace over and above the ordinary graces available to all Christians.

Some chosen souls appear to enjoy more than the ordinary gift of faith and the power to love and serve God. They seem to enjoy a supernatural knowledge and love beyond that of other generous souls, as though in some manner they participated more fully in God's own knowledge and love of Himself, and thus shared more intimately in the life of the Blessed Trinity and of the blessed in heaven. In their case, grace appears to do more than cooperate with their human effort. It is as if God produces in them a knowledge and love that exceeds all that can be felt or expressed by the faculties, although it is experienced by the soul.

The whole mystery of the relationship between any human soul and its Creator, at any phase and therefore especially at the stage of mystical union, springs from the nature of man's being. Dependent as he is on the creative act of an eternal Creator, an act that is described in its temporal effects as an act of conservation, man's whole conscious life is passed in a space-time world; yet he is more than a "pilgrim of eternity." The roots of his being, at a level deeper than consciousness, are to be found in the very Being of God Himself. Because of original sin the consciousness of God that would seem to be connatural to man has become fitful and obscure. It can be restored only by a rigid process of "purgation," a deliberate effort to turn away from this space-time world of everyday experience to concentrate on the eternal reality of God.

Precisely because so much of our conscious life is inextricably bound up with this world of sense, the process of purgation is a painful one. Hence follows the dark night of the senses, then the dark night of the soul, in the course of which the personality is detached from that absorption in temporal, material reality that has become connatural to man. Hence comes, too, the traditional insistence on the via negativa, the attainment to some knowledge of God by seeing Him as the denial of all that is commonly thought and felt by human beings through the ordinary channels. In this "cloud of unknowing," the mystic learns God by unlearning, so to speak, everything that is not God. Moreover, unlike the objects of ordinary knowing, God is not the passive object of the mystic's contemplation. Rather is He the active inspiration, an overwhelming Power to whom the mystic submits freely and therefore not inertly. The surrender becomes an immense enrichment, simply because the knowledge and love of God is the consummation of man's purpose.

The mystic's knowledge of God. St. Thomas Aquinas developed what has come to be accepted as the classic explanation of what we may call the mechanics of the intellectual communication implicit in the experience of mystical union. Human knowledge begins with some sense of awareness. On this raw material—the colored shapes, the sounds and feelings, the scents and tastes produced by physical and chemical interaction between an external object and the sense organ—the intellect works to "abstract" the idea or concept that is the specific object of normal, human rational activity. Out of changeable phenomena is derived the changeless concept. By linking together these abstract ideas the mind makes judgments; it reasons and infers. Ordinarily in the act of thinking the concept is never entirely free of a penumbra of images or phantasms, be they no more than the words in which we normally clothe our ideas. (Yet we do distinguish between the word and the idea, as is shown by those occasions when, as we say, we are trying to find the right word to express what is in our minds.)

In the highest forms of intellectual activity, it does seem that the image becomes less and less helpful and can indeed be a positive nuisance. The most obvious example is provided by mathematical reasoning. The geometrical figure, the algrebraic formulas are necessary to begin the process; but the stage is reached sooner or later when what we are thinking of bears only the remotest relation to what can be pictured: the curve is replaced by the formula, which is seen to bear less relation to what it purports to describe than do the stenographer's notes to the rhetorical cadences of the speaker, or the notes of a musical score to the symphony or sonata as it is created by the composer or performed by the orchestra.

Perhaps there was some way of knowing that began with an immediate activity of intellect without any previous stage of sensation and abstraction. Since any created nature is finite and liable to imperfection, only by special divine help would human nature be able to abide permanently in the enjoyment of a situation calling for the complete integration and subordination of all its faculties to the purposes of the spiritual side of its being. Having lost that preternatural endowment, man, of himself, is no longer capable of that intellectual awareness of God which, if awareness is to be adequate, must obviously be free from the distorting effects of imagery. God is pure spirit and is therefore not to be described in language drawn from sense experience.

But there seems to be no reason in the nature of things why, in some cases and for special reasons, God should not confer a grace that might restore a person temporarily to that condition of perfection that man enjoyed before the Fall. We may presume that whereas in an unfallen state man's preternatural endowments would enable him to enjoy such an immediate awareness of God while still retaining his normal consciousness, direct awareness is not possible in the fallen state except at the price of a suspension of normal consciousness. In St. Thomas's words:

In contemplation, God is seen by a medium which is the light of wisdom elevating the mind to discern the divine…; and thus the divine is seen by the contemplative by means of grace after sin, though more perfectly in the state of innocence. [De ver. 18.1 ad 4.]

The foregoing remains no more than a theory, but as far as it goes, it is a coherent explanation and serves as at least a useful working hypothesis. It helps us also to understand why the mystic, after his experience, is invariably incapable of describing what happened or even, it would seem, of remembering anything at all except that something did happen. Thus St. Augustine says:

Thy invisible things, understood by those that are made, I saw indeed, but was not able to fix my gaze thereon; my weakness was beaten back, and I was reduced to my ordinary experience (Conf. 7.23).

Moreover, as F. L. Mascall says (Christ, the Christian and the Church, 61):

When the soul tries to describe this object to itself, when it tries to relate this knowledge to knowledge obtained by normal means, and above all when it tries to tell other people about it, it is faced with an enormous problem of translation and interpretation.

A. F. Poulain, in an exhaustive treatise on this subject, includes examples of some remarkable ways in which mystics interpreted their experiences. Thus St. Mechtild apparently declared that Christ had told her in a vision that the virtue of patience was especially dear to Him because patientia combines pax and scientia; St. Catherine of Siena claimed to have had a vision in which Our Lady revealed that she was not conceived immaculate! In individual cases, of course, it is possible to doubt whether any genuine mystical experience did in fact occur; but it is equally possible to suppose that, in attempting to translate into normal language and thought the contents of some mystical illumination, even a saint must be reduced to an ordinary way of thinking.

Validity of mystical experience. At this point, the question may well be asked, by both the skeptic and the sincere believer, whether there may not be some validity in R. A. Vaughan's unkind definition: "Mysticism is that form of error which mistakes for a divine manifestation operations of a merely human faculty." How can the mystics be said to "know" something that cannot be expressed in words and communicated to others, or rendered explicit by the mystics even to the mystics themselves? Perhaps it must be admitted that mystical experiences cannot be "justified" or authenticated by and in themselves. But this is not to say that there is no answer to the question raised here.

There is danger of concentrating too closely on mystical experience as an isolated phenomenon, dissecting the statements of this or that individual mystic, and so losing sight of the whole history of the subject. For in the words of William James: "There is about mystical utterances an eternal unanimity which ought to make a critic stop and think."

First, there is the general background of the long line of Christian mystics to be considered. The intellectual equipment, temperamental qualities, and educational opportunities of such men and women as SS. John, Paul, Augustine, the Pseudo-Dionysius, SS. Gregory, Bernard, Teresa of Avila, and John of the Cross, to say nothing of the English and German mystics, were so vastly different that one might expect differing approaches to mystical activity and widely dissimilar consequences. Yet, despite immense difference in detail, there is an almost monotonous sameness about their general attitudes to the basic matters of moral conduct and religious beliefs. If mystical experience were no more than a self-induced trance, and if the alleged intuition of a divine reality were sheer hallucination, it is remarkable that these baseless and purely subjective phenomena should be under the control of a persisting framework of ideas and beliefs.

Forgetting for the moment the specific problem of the authenticity of mystical experiences, one might look at normal Christian belief and practice. We believe that this world of material substance and rational and moral activity is but the surface of an unfathomed abyss of energy, eternally operative and effective.

"The weariness, the fever and the fret" that make up the conscious content of normal human experience cannot be understood save in relation to an external existence, which is the deepest reality. From that deepest reality man has come to live out his little day, realizing, as best he may with the help of God, the perfection for which he was made. Even apart from the assurance of revelation, there is what is described by Dean Inge as "the raw material of all religion, and perhaps of all philosophy and art as well, namely that dim consciousness of the beyond, which is part of our nature as human beings." At the heart of the Christian message is the doctrine that the world of man and the world of God, time and eternity, meet and blend in the Incarnate Word. Our reasons for believing this have nothing to do with mysticism.

Mysticism, on the other hand, has a history of experience in which the mystic claims to have been in immediate contact with the Ground of Being, known in an intellectual way that is free from imaginative content and incapable of normal conceptualization. Further, the result of the total experience is not so much a deepening of understanding as a sort of fusing of personalities. Hence the prevalence of language and imagery drawn from the common experience of human love, an experience leading to physical union in which the lovers seek to express an identification of interests, desires, joys, and delights as symbolizing a longing for union of personality. It is not given to mortals to achieve such union; but, from the accounts the mystics have left, it would seem that somehow it is achieved in the highest form of their experience, sometimes even described as a "mystical marriage." Now human love is a powerful revealer of personality. Through love one comes to know another in a profounder way than by the ordinary exchange of social contact. (It is not without significance that we speak of a man's "knowing" a woman in sexual intercourse.) The difference between God's self-revelation in what may be called the ordinary ways—through the Prophets, the teaching Church—and what is given to the mystic in his special experiences may well be that, in the latter, there is a fusing of will and intellect in one act, analogous to but immeasurably fuller than the communion of souls that is experienced in human love.

Recalling Gerson's definition—"knowledge of God arrived at through the embrace of unifying love"—we might suggest that, in the mystic's experience, there is a complete coordination of both intellect and will, directed toward God, who is the perfect and adequate end of their activity. Hence, it can be seen why the effect of mystical contemplation is not merely, not even primarily, an illumination of the intellect but chiefly a deepening of the whole personality, an enriching of character, a development of virtue. It is this fact that, in the end, is the guarantee of the mystic's claim. For in the authentic mystic, we have a man or woman who is invariably distinguished for integrity, candor, and sensitivity of conscience. At the state of ordinary awareness, he shares our ideals, our beliefs, our principles of conduct. It is conceivable that, in some cases, the mystic's alleging of his experience of God is a piece of self-deception, hallucination, hysteria, megalomania, and the like. But it is absurd to suggest that all the mystics are so deceived all the time. Once it is admitted that some of the mystics may be right sometimes, that some of them genuinely "experience God" in an act wherein the whole of their spiritual nature, will, and intellect is operating at the highest level attainable by man (and then only with the special assistance of God), there is sufficient ground for claiming the mystics as witnesses, in a sense eyewitnesses, to the ultimate truth after which the rest of us are dimly groping.

Modern interest. Current interest in mysticism is both theoretical and practical, is not limited to the educated or initiated, and is ecumenical or cross-cultural in its orientation. An adequate assessment of the current situation needs to consider more than the spectacular or exotic features, which, in the long view of Christian history, suggest the déjà vu rather than innovation. Particular notice should be taken of new directions in Christian spirituality, presaged by current mystical language and symbolism. Furthermore, its rather broad theoretical base adds a dimension to the contemporary renascence of mysticism which prompts more serious reflection and indicates that Christian spirituality may be in the process of significant modification.

Scholarly or theoretical interest in mysticism has been steady and fruitful, even if not intense, throughout the present century. William James' chapter "Mysticism" in his Varieties of Religious Experience (1902), with its observation that mysticism discloses a realm of consciousness beyond the rational, gave an unremitting impetus to the study of mysticism by the behavioral and social sciences and to the continuing dialogue within and among these disciplines. The comparative study of religions has considerably improved the comprehension of a notoriously elusive subject. Even the well-known experimental attempts to induce mystical experiences by means of drugs have led to meaningful distinctions between the religious goal of spiritual endeavor and its occasional exotic sensory accompaniments. Reasonable facsimiles of the latter can be artificially stimulated, and this fact, itself well known for centuries, has reemphasized the age-old cautions of the spiritual masters against overvaluation of emotional states.

Interest in mysticism as experiential also follows behavioral science's concerns with the role and function of emotion generally, especially in its capacity to add richness and depth to life. Proliferation of sensitivity clinics and awareness institutes of indescribable variety is some indication of a general search for emotional fulfillment, a datum which corroborates theoretical observations. The successful quest for more intense feelings of personal intimacy as well as for a closer relationship with nature and life generally, has made the so-called peak experience, described by Abraham Maslow, less extraordinary.

Developments in theology. In the theological sphere of theory, modern Christian theologians, unlike their medieval predecessors, have not given much attention to the mystical emphasis. Post-Tridentine Catholic theology, with its defensive stress on ritual efficacy and ecclesiastical authority, felt compelled to relegate mysticism to the exotic realm inhabited by a few "chosen souls" on the way to "infused contemplation." Mainline Protestant theology had little need for mystical vision because "this worldly," mundane activity was not seen to have any causal relationship to salvation and hence did not need to be transcended. Protestantism represented a "this-worldly ascetism" rather than an "other-worldly mysticism" in Max Weber's categories. The anti-mysticism of Karl Barth and Emile Brunner reflect this emphasis.

Current theological interest in mysticism owes much to ecumenical developments. Mystical traditions within the major religions seem to share so much common ground that ecumenical endeavor frequently appears superfluous. Recent exponents of the view that at their highest, mystical levels, the world religions are, in reality, one religion (e.g. A. Huxley, F. Schuon, and S. Radakrishnan) have understandably been criticized for glossing over precious and essential distinctions, but their positions do highlight areas of almost ready-made religious unity. Conceptions of the Absolute and, even more so, descriptions of ineffable experience, tend linguistically to converge as they approach what they perceive to be their respective goals.

In its ecumenical concerns Christian theology has begun what promises to be an enormously fruitful discussion with comparative-religions studies. Mystical world-views as well as mystical practices are three major preoccupations among comparative-religions scholars which have already stimulated some development in Christian mystical theology. Jungian psychology has also proved to be an important partner to this multileveled conversation. William Johnston's works on Zen and Christian mysticism offer a distinguished example of the theological enrichment available from such comparative studies. Robert Zaehner's comparative studies of Hindu, Muslim, and Christian mysticism have also made an enormous contribution, not only by way of generating scholarly interest in the subject but also by reason of his clarification of similarities and differences.

Some support is given scholarly concerns by widespread popular interest in Zen and Yoga. The faddish nature of the popular brands is often obvious, but the very fact of concern or curiosity, and especially its breadth, could signal substantial readjustment in overall religious orientation. At the very least it indicates a dissatisfaction with religious resources traditionally available in the Christian West. Even though such forms as Yoga and techniques as Transcendental Meditation assert their nonreligious nature and are allegedly compatible with the traditional faiths, it is apparent that all but the merely physical ("Yoga as exercise") do clash in some way with traditional Christianity (see yoga).

Significance for Christian spirituality. From the two distinguishing and mutually inseparable marks of the mystical phenomenon, namely its experiential emphasis and its unitive worldview, several observations relative to contemporary Christian spirituality suggest themselves. To some extent these two marks or characteristics correspond to the correlative symbols Self and Universe, and any decided enlargement of consciousness in either area would elicit a corresponding reaction toward maintaining intimacy and cohesion between the two. Historical periods witnessing significant world expansion and its corresponding threat to intellectual and psychological cosmos are invariably accompanied by a rise in mystical experience and a more comprehensive religious worldview.

The mystical vision of Teilhard de Chardin accommodates an impressive range of recent world-expanding discovery, stretching from paleontology's substantial revisions regarding human origins all the way to nuclear theory and space travel. With the affirmation characteristic of the mystic and an imminentism at times nearly indistinguishable from pantheism, he offers a spirituality in his The Divine Milieu, which meshes with contemporary valuations of nature, science, and technology and which, in its cosmic sweep, is little disturbed by the hairsplitting details that exercised traditional dogmatic and moral theology. His vision offers Christians, both Protestant and Catholic, an affirmative valuation of work and invention, of learning and recreation. For Teilhard, as well as for his kindred spirit in India, Sri Aurobindo Ghose, all these activities are inherently religious and need no ritual blessing or specific intention to make them so. Matter itself is raised to the plane of the spiritual and this coincidentia oppositorum finds resonance in the social sphere where the mystical and the prophetic become one in the cause of social reform.

Contrary to many popular images, the mystical religious mode is not extraordinary and is not for reclusive types. As James and others have asserted, there is a mystical dimension in all serious and sincere religion. Contemporary religion's emphasis on social problems, its deemphasis of institutional and clerical prerogatives, its diminished enthusiasm for laws, forms, and ritual all bear upon the current interest in mysticism. Even rather ordinary or commonplace religious experience can be personally transforming and authoritative and, because of its immediacy, tends to reduce dependence on institutional structures and to call into question their very relevance. This helps explain the apparent inner freedom as well as the specific orientation of such famous innovators and reformers as Paul, Bernard, Catherine of Siena, Eckhart, and Cusanus.

Teilhard's is by no means the only mystical vision influencing contemporary spirituality. An approach that can be thought of as a personalist emphasis forming a salutary counterbalance to Teilhard's universalism is the I-Thou religious vision of Martin Buber. Despite Buber's demurrer, his spiritual approach bears all the necessary marks of the mystical mode: it is experiential, comprehensive, immediate, and transforming. Buber's influence upon Catholic spirituality continues to be both deep and broad. Thomas Merton's life and example have been influential in sustaining an interest in contemplative spirituality, and he himself embodied the cross-cultural emphasis mentioned above. His last days were spent in Asia pursuing the mystic ideal. He is significant not so much for the power of his vision as for the orientation and persistence of his quest. Finally, mention should be made of Simone Weil, a mystic of powerful and awe-inspiring conviction, whose importance for the spirituality of the future should not be minimized. As visionaries all of these shared a deep engagement in the world and helped set the tone for a spirituality of personalism and human concern, global in its orientation and resource, affirmative in its assessment of nature and action.

Bibliography: From an almost limitless selection, the following brief list gives a representative picture. w. r. inge, Christian Mysticism (London 1899). a. thorold, An Essay in Aid of the Better Appreciation of Catholic Mysticism (London 1900). w. james, The Varieties of Religious Experience (New York 1902). r. m. jones, Studies in Mystical Religion (London 1909). a. f. poulain, The Graces of Interior Prayer, tr. l. l. yorke smith (St. Louis 1950). a. b. sharpe, Mysticism: Its True Nature and Value (St. Louis 1910). e. underhill, Mysticism (12th ed. rev. New York 1960); The Essentials of Mysticism … (New York 1920). e. c. butler, Western Mysticism (London 1922). f. von hÜgel, The Mystical Element of Religion, 2 v. (2d ed. London 1923). r. otto, Mysticism East and West, tr. b. l. bracey (New York 1932). j. chapman, The Spiritual Letters … , ed. r. hudleston (2d ed. London 1935). r. a. knox, Enthusiasm (New York 1961). d. knowles, The English Mystical Tradition (New York 1961). s. spencer, Mysticism in World Religion (Baltimore 1963). f. c. happold, Mysticism: A Study and an Anthology (Baltimore 1963), excellent bibliog. m. l. furse, Mysticism: Window on a World View (Nashville 1977). g. harkness, Mysticism: Its Meaning and Message (Nashville 1973). w. johnston, The Still Poinṭ Reflections on Zen and Christian Mysticism (New York 1977).