After paging through my draft proposal and talking through my idea for a book about experiencing God’s mysterious, glorious presence using all our senses, even, especially, our “sixth” ones, my would-be editor looked at me and said, “It’s like practical mysticism.”
With that, I knew this was the place my book needed to land. I didn’t care what amount of money they offered, what their royalty rates were, what their ability to connect my book with my audience was (well, I cared a little about these things), with those two words, I knew my book had been understood and my idea had found a home.
And not just because the editor described my project so well, but because she described me so well. In fact, the moment itself turned into a rather sweet moment in God’s mysterious, glorious presence because of those two words. You see, probably 20 years before a therapist had described me as “practical.” This sounds silly, but it was one of those moments when someone cuts to the quick (in a good way) of who you are. The moment with my therapist stands out as one of my first times feeling completely understood and known by another person.
Then, probably 10 years later, a colleague called me a “bit of a mystic.” The word mystic caught me off guard. After all, practical people aren’t mystical, right? Especially not ones who love of reason and rationality and straight-up knowledge the way I do. And yet, as I talked to my colleague about my experiences with God — about the times I knew God to be real, about the times I knew God saw and heard and spoke to me, about how I sought God’s wisdom in the midst of my many, many questions — my colleague squinted and said, “Wow. I wouldn’t have guessed you were a bit of a mystic.”
Neither would I have. But again, this was an identity-shaping moment. I’ve clung to that word ever since.
So you can imagine my surprise when out of this conversation with my editor came the words: practical mysticism. Frankly, I was surprised there wasn’t lightening, that her declaration wasn’t followed by claps of thunder. It was, well, practically mystical.
I tell this story only to add some background so you understand better a new concern. Although I know not everyone’s theology jives with the mystics or mysticism and though I know plenty who roll their eyes at those of us who speak of “hearing from God” or having a moment of spiritual ecstasy, I did not realize there were Christian folks who found mysticism heretical. Silly me. Of course, there’s no shortage Christians ready to find anything heretical.
But truly, I did not know, for instance, that folks critiqued Ann Voskamp’s One Thousand Gifts and questioned her faithfulness because she senses God in her writing cabin out at the edge of the fields or in “three gifts round” or in gratitude in general. Similar “charges” have been leveled against Sarah Young’s Jesus Calling.
I’m not saying these books (or any) are above critique, but really? People write them off as “dangerous” mystics?
They do. And I’m troubled. After all, Christianity has been filled with mystics since the get-go. St. Peter went into a trance, for crying out loud. And God’s people — from Julian of Norwich to Thomas Merton and Ann Voskamp and, well, me — have been having rather other-worldly experiences with God ever since. Truth be told: God’s people have been having other-worldly experiences with God long before Christianity. From burning bushes to Samuel’s ghost, from the Psalms to the Prophets, our faith — one where flesh-and-blood humans worship a spirited God — is rooted deep in the ooky-spooky mystical realm, whether we like to use that sort of language or not.
So I’m left scratching my head? What’s the big problem with mystics? Is it that mysticism is too personal or unclear? Just that it makes no earthly sense? That some think it smacks of New Age-ism? That it’s hard to understand how we can hear God in the crackle of a branch without believing God is the branch?
Here’s what I know, my answer to the mystic mystery: God chose to reveal himself to us in many ways — through his Word, through his creation, through the life of Jesus Christ, through the whispers of the Spirit and the serendipities of life. And without the belief that we can indeed experience God in unexplainable, sometimes other-worldly, ooky-spooky ways, our faith seems so, well, impractical.
________


I think the problem is the lack of systematic theology. I am prone to be careful with theology, and I’ll admit to raising an eyebrow sometimes when someone tells me what he or she just heard from God, but I am equally frustrated with the reformed culture writing off these beautiful, and I think sound, theologies. Voskamp’s “black spots” are a cathedral (pagan), poetic style (confusing theological truth with lying beauty), or a Catholic priest (heathen). They are closing themselves off from so much of Christendom!
And interestingly, Voskamp’s book was one of the more practical I’ve read in my Christian life.
Hope, to add to that… the “reformed camp” whereof you speak has a restricted view of what counts for knowledge and where knowledge comes from (a view contrary to most of Christian history and common sense). And it often inhibits actual spiritual growth, freedom, study, inquiry, imagination, art… and, even worse, it keeps God from being interactive with his people, like a lover who was lost a sea whom we hope will one day return.. Strange as it may sound, but it is a practical deism when God only works with us through Scripture and that his last response to us was 2000 years ago. What exactly does the Baptism of the Holy Spirit mean, if not God coming near to do new work in our lives?
Not long ago I heard a well-known speaking in that “camp” say that the Bible is sufficent. Then he quoted Peter which says, “his divine nature has given us everything we need for life and godliness.” I had to pause. “Divine nature” is not the same as the Bible. The rest of the verse says, “According to the knowledge that works in us.” So the Bible (and other areas of revelation) give us accesst and knowledge of God. But these do not give us what we need for life and godliness. God himself does that and alll the ways we encounter him, his love, his teaching, his nudging, his mysteries! It’s a wonderful thing to know that the Counselor is more than pen and ink on a printed page.
And here I have to step in with my defending of the Reformed. Although, what I believe is being referred to here is the “neo-Reformed” camp and culture.
You see, I’m as Reformed as they come. I’m a member of the Christian Reformed Church and a graduate of Calvin College, for crying out loud! : )
That said, very little in our Reformed tradition stands at odd with mysticism. In fact, my tradition has fueled my mysticism in many ways. The whole idea of “sphere sovereignty” makes it nearly impossible to NOT see God in everything. If, after all, we believe that God is the God of math and the God of animals and the God of blogging and the God of medicine and the God of the stars and on and on, it’s hard to separate the Creator from all that….
So…it’s really the “neo-Reformed” folks (the Reformed Baptists, etc), I think that you run into trouble with here… But I could be wrong.
But I also hear what you’re saying about the trouble with everyone running around claiming, “The Lord told me…” When I was a magazine editor, we’d always chuckle about the query letters that would begin with, “God told me you need to publish this.” And we’d wonder why God wasn’t giving us the same message! : )
That said, JUST the other day, an elderly man walked up to me and said “God told me to give you this.” And it was a card beagle puppies and 1 Peter 5:7 on it. I had been struggle with worry and anxiety and had just been asking God to help me with this. Perhaps it was creepy coincidence. Or, perhaps God did urge him in some way…..
Thanks for stepping in and distinguishing the Reformed as well as standing up for practical mystics. When I was writing and teaching on theology of prayer as a student at Calvin Seminary in the mid 90′s, some faculty members encouraged me to use more Richard Foster. And we should never forget Calvin’s own emphasis on the inner testimony, or of the world as the theater of God’s glory, or Barth’s doctrine of the Word. Mostly thanks for the tag, “practical mystic.” I plan to use it!
I echo Jim… Thanks for clarifying the distinction. Many loud voices today claim the Reformed tradition and then wiggle their own ends into it.
And Jim, you may be interested in Evelyn Underhill’s book on “Practical Mysticism” too. She’s one of the great modern spiritual writers.
I’ll take a look at it, Dale. Maybe after I take a look at Caryn’s *Grumble Hallelujah* which my wife is thoroughly enjoying,right now!
LOVE IT! : )
Excellent post! (Says a fellow practical mystic!
)
The mystic is the least mystical part of mysticism. The mystic is quite ordinary. It is everything else that is extraordinary.
Why should we think any of it extraordinary, A.T.?
Caryn,
Just wanted to say thanks for writing about this topic. I hope we’ll be hearing more from you on it, too.
With my background in independent Baptist churches in the southern states, I felt all thumbs when I first started reading mystics. Not weirded-out or scandalized necessarily, but more like the only person at the party who can’t dance but wants to. Madeleine L’Engle’s writings helped me tremendously to see the practical side to mysticism. Oh yes indeed. A writer, a church volunteer (in the country in Connecticut or in the heart of NYC),and a wife and mom of three, she had to be practical, but she never lost her appreciation for and exercising of the mystic mystery.
…on another note, welcome to Breakfast Reading!
Very nice have your voice here, too.
susan
Caryn,
Thanks you for writing on this topic. I’ve noticed there’s a lot of emphasis on right theology and the word, but less emphasis on the Word, Jesus. I think its a mistake to think that we can only know God through the Bible. Why did Jesus say his sheep would know his voice if he doesn’t speak to us? Why do we have the Holy Spirit is we can’t know him in a mystical, spiritual kind of way? Why are we encouraged to pray and have a relationship with God if he doesn’t interact with us? Of course anything can be taken to extremes and we need to know the Word in order not go off into weird areas, but I think this generation wants a faith thats more personal and experiential. Excited to read your book!
Totally agree, Julie. Thanks for sharing.
Amen! When I discovered the mystics, it was like my soul got a big gulp of fresh spring air. It pointed me in a much more mysterious view of God but as you say, also much more engaged/present relationship with God. Your book sounds really interesting, I’ll have to look for it!
“practical mysticism,” one could suggest, understands neither practicality nor mysticism. It’s as if one could somehow rationally connect a hammer with an Aria.
The other alternative is–like most modern Christian ideas–being able to have the transcendent on the cheap, as it were.
Additionally, people are suspicious of mystics because they are suspicious of elites. Oddly, evangelicals don’t really believe in hierarchy even if they function in hierarchical manner. A firmly protestant conviction is that no one has privileged access to God, and to be a mystic is to claim, in some sense, special status with Him.
Special status with God is irrevocable bound up in discourses of power in the modern imagination…