The Place of Mysticism in Anglicanism

[HardHead]

It wouldn't matter if they did know the history because they can't find it in the Bible (even though it seems to me the 'sons of the prophets' lived a life that corresponds to monasticism).

I agree. I often think that this practice is biblical given that Jesus was in the wilderness for forty days meditating/contemplating and fasting. This is clearly mystical in scope given his experience with Satan as part of this, and it’s also evocative of monasticism especially the kind practiced by the Desert Fathers and Mothers.

It's seen as a diversion from what we should really be on about as the church, which is seeking to bring the gospel to those in darkness etc.

Yeah, that rings true. It’s a different focus perhaps.

 

[HardHead]

This conversation also makes me think of saints.

I recall that Anglicans follow saints on days that are similar to the Catholic calendar. I see room for mystical experiences in the church through saints as well as monastics. From how I have seen this, most churches that recognise sainthoods (heroes/heroines) and monasticism are more open to mystical happenings in general.

Also, I see this idea of mystical as important to Christians in general. Consider Mary and her profound experience during the visitation from the angel where Mary accepted the assignment so to speak. I find it interesting that she seems to casually talk to the angel as if she did this often so that the conversation appears ordinary for the reader of the story.

That must have been an incredibly spiritual and mystical life for her even prior to the encounter with the angel. Beyond that, giving birth to God is certainly mystical. How could it not be?

This and all sorts of other biblical examples regarding the prophets are available for reference for Christians to follow.

 

[Shane R]

And I think also because monasticism isn't seen as having a missional/evangelistic edge. It's seen as a diversion from what we should really be on about as the church, which is seeking to bring the gospel to those in darkness etc.

And that's unfortunate since the Dominicans were known as itinerant preachers in Medieval times. And the Jesuits, whatever one thinks of them, began as an evangelistic order. Although, of all the weird things I have seen in North American Anglicanism, I have not seen any Anglicans claim to be Jesuits.

 

[Paidiske]

And that's unfortunate since the Dominicans were known as itinerant preachers in Medieval times. And the Jesuits, whatever one thinks of them, began as an evangelistic order. Although, of all the weird things I have seen in North American Anglicanism, I have not seen any Anglicans claim to be Jesuits.

To be fair, though, (and my contact with contemporary Anglican orders is relatively limited) one couldn't really say they were doing heaps of evangelistic work now.

A lot of my lecturers were Jesuits and I appreciate the spirituality of that order, but no, we definitely don't have anything quite like that!

 

[everbecoming2007]

To be fair, though, (and my contact with contemporary Anglican orders is relatively limited) one couldn't really say they were doing heaps of evangelistic work now.

A lot of my lecturers were Jesuits and I appreciate the spirituality of that order, but no, we definitely don't have anything quite like that!

People are different, though. Not everyone is called to a literal mission field. Some are writers. Some provide meaningful reflection. And so on.

Although I am not a monastic, I live a life of mostly solitary prayer when I'm not at the Eucharist. I don't preach, though I have had some writings adapted into homilies by others.

But I do have my own mission, my own little way. I have no family in my household, and at times I'll drop everything to go to that one needful soul to show my kindness and to pray on their behalf. And it changes something in both parties.

The more contemplative monastics likewise have their own ways of nourishing others. It may not always involve mission as traditionally understood. But that doesn't make their means of ministry less important.

We need the soulful introverts in the church along with monasti orders and others that are more outwardly oriented.

 

[Paidiske]

I'm not saying monasticism isn't valuable or doesn't contribute to the life of the church, it is and it does!

But the days when monastics were itinerant preachers and the like don't reflect what we have now. That's not a criticism, it's just a description.