THOMAS À KEMPIS AND MEDIEVAL MYSTICISM (PART II)

“The Noetic Quality of Mysticism”

By Prof. Hanko | Professor Emeritus of Church History and New Testament in the Protestant Reformed Seminary

Introduction

In our last article we introduced the subject of mysticism in the Middle Ages by describing the life of Thomas à Kempis, a late medieval mystic from Germany, who spent most of his life in the Netherlands. We also spoke of his most famous book, The Imitation of Christ, a book that continues to be read and appreciated to the present.

In this article and following ones we shall discuss the characteristics of mysticism and why it constitutes such a threat to the church of Christ.

The Prevalence of Mysticism

I mentioned in my last article that there is scarcely a period in the history of the church when the church was free from all forms of mysticism. Already in the early church, the Montanists, to which Tertullian joined himself late in life, represented this mystical tendency to which many in the church were inclined.

The Medieval Period of church history was filled with mystics, individuals and communities. In the years just prior to the Reformation, many communities of mystics were crowded into the Rhine Valley in Germany and the Netherlands. Mysticism flourished in these fog-shrouded valleys.

Mysticism did not stop with the Reformation. Very early in the history of Luther’s Reformation, Luther was confronted by the Zwickau Prophets in particular and the Anabaptists in general, who possessed their own brands of mysticism.

Charles Wesley was heavily influenced by medieval mysticism, translated books of the mystics, and infused Methodism with his mysticism. (See Robert G. Tuttle, Mysticism in the Wesleyan Tradition.)

In the Netherlands the gezel – schappen, or conventicles, which arose during the Later Reformation were often characterized by a mystical tendency, a tendency from which the Dutch churches never completely escaped. 

Mysticism has reached new heights in the modern-day Charismatic Movement.

Characteristics of Mysticism

Searching around for a general definition of mysticism, especially that of the medieval church, I found the following paragraph in the book of Tuttle referred to above. He writes:

“Perhaps as good a definition as any could begin with the statement that mysticism is anything that gets one in touch with reality beyond the physical senses. Furthermore, mysticism embraces a “right brain” awareness of God and all mystics stress (more or less) the essential unity of God, nature, and humankind; therefore, union with God can be achieved (more or less) through the mystical contemplation of the unity. More specifically, mysticism is in essence that “deep sense of union with God in the inmost depths of the soul,” an immediate awareness of a unique relationship with God. “It is religion in its most acute, intense, and living state.”

A bit further on, the same author writes:

“Several characteristics have been listed as common to all mystical experience. First of all, mysticism defies expression, and its ineffable character makes it virtually impossible for mystics to describe their experiences adequately. Another characteristic of mysticism lies in its “noetic quality.” To understand mysticism, one must experience mysticism. Its thoroughly esoteric nature plunges the soul into depths of truth unplumbed by the discursive intellect. The mystical experience is also transitory because the mystical heights cannot be sustained for long, but this is not to imply that no growth has taken place. Ideally, after each experience the mystic returns to a level of devotion even higher than before. In fact, these “mystical heights” are nonessential to mysticism and can be justified only if the mystic returns to the senses with a higher level of devotion.”

It is easy to understand how mysticism in many cases began to emphasize dreams, visions, and other forms of revelation which one would receive directly from God apart from the Scriptures. When the Zwickau Prophets boasted of the revelations they had received from the Holy Spirit, Martin Luther responded, “I hit your holy spirit on the snout.” Luther’s point was that the Holy Spirit speaks only through the objective Scriptures.

It is also easy to see how in many instances some sort of mystical experience was considered the decisive determination of the Christian life.

The Explanation of Mysticism

We can find, I think, an explanation for mysticism and its constant attractiveness. In a sense, mysticism is an effort of the church to pay her unpaid bills. Mysticism arises when the Church does not preach the full Gospel of Jesus Christ, or, at least, does not live fully the gospel which she preaches.

Man is created by God as a creature with a soul. The soul includes mind and will. And the will, in turn, includes the powers of choice and the powers of emotions. God has determined that fellowship with Him through Jesus Christ includes the whole man in body and soul, in mind and will. My only comfort is that I, with body and soul, am not my own, but belong to Jesus. A true religion which is undefiled satisfies the whole man in body and soul. Basically, that means that a true religion satisfies man’s mind and will – both. It brings the whole man into fellowship with God.

But the Church has had trouble maintaining that proper balance. When Montanism arose and Tertullian chose to become a part of it, the reason was partly because, during a period of rest from persecution, the Church had become worldly. Eusebius makes that point in his History of the Church; and Eusebius was a contemporary of Nicea in the early part of the fourth century.

In the Middle Ages the Roman Catholic Church developed a religion in which the worship of God was reduced to outward liturgical forms and actions. The inward worship of the heart was ignored. One needed only to go through the motions of ecclesiastically prescribed liturgy; that was enough. When scholasticism was in favor, the appeal of religion was to the intellect, and the one able to make the subtlest distinctions, the most difficult analyses of intellectual propositions, was the one hailed as being the most religious. No passion, no intensity of feeling, no emotional content, no concern for godly living. Religion was in externals or intellectual attainment.

And so, mysticism flourished as a reaction to what was often a cold, formal religion without heart. Man is more than a head which thinks. He is also a soul which feels, loves, hates, grieves, sings; and this part of man has to be caught up in his religion.

Then again, when mysticism flourishes and religion is reduced to feeling and emotion, the mind is left empty. The child of God has nothing to chew on with his mind, nothing to think about, nothing to remember, nothing to learn. How does he feel? Does his religion make him feel good? Those are the only questions that count.

The pendulum in the Church swings back and forth. It swings towards mysticism during periods of worldliness and dead orthodoxy. And it swings towards intellectualism when religion is reduced to feeling. But both are reactions. Mysticism is the swing of the pendulum towards feeling.

Mysticism also takes on other characteristics. It often arises out of a genuine concern about a life of godliness and piety, especially when worldliness and carnal mindedness capture the Church. Especially when dead orthodoxy is present, many within the Church worry that religion is only outward. People go to Church, but worship in spirit and in truth is often lacking. People have their confessions, but know almost nothing about them. People claim to have the truth, but seem unwilling to defend it, or perhaps unable as they perish for lack of knowledge.

What counts, therefore, is not these outward forms of religion, but the true religion of the heart. True piety, true godliness, a genuine devotional life – that is what counts. And so, mysticism is concerned about the cultivation of the devotional life, the development of piety and holiness, the life of prayer and meditation. These are hailed as the true marks of Christianity. This was the mysticism of Thomas à Kempis. This was the mysticism so prevalent among the mystics of the Rhine River Valley.

But this too develops along a certain line. The Church is composed of many people. Many are only outwardly religious. Who are the truly religious? That is (and this is the form such a question inevitably takes), who are truly godly, truly pious, truly holy? That is, who are true believers? How can one tell? How can one tell for others? How can one tell for himself?

So often, precisely here, questions which could be proper, necessary, and important become the bridge to mysticism in its worst forms. It is not wrong to be concerned for piety and godliness. It is not wrong to cultivate inner piety. These are necessary parts of what religion is all about. But the next step is dangerous. 

True piety and true religion are, after all, close fellowship with God. But how does one know whether he truly has fellowship with God? This knowledge comes by way of mystical experiences of closest and most intimate contact with the divine being in which there is indescribable and yet overwhelmingly sweet communion. Dreams, visions, revelations, overwhelming joy, feelings that transport one beyond life, all these are part of that sort of fellowship with God which marks genuine piety and which is, finally, the mark of the true believer.

To be continued.