The reading of St. John of the Cross poses many questions. Here are just a few to come to mind, and we invite you to present your own.

Doesn't John of the Cross really have a negative outlook about creation? He says, for example, in The Ascent of Mt. Carmel:

"The reason for which it is necessary for the soul, in order to attain to Divine union with God, to pass through this dark night of mortification of the desires and denial of pleasures in all things, is because all the affections which it has for creatures are pure darkness in the eyes of God..." (Ascent Bk 1, Ch. IV, n.1)

A little later he says, "...all the creatures are nothing; and their affections, we may say, are less than nothing, since they are an impediment to transformation in God and the privation thereof, even as darkness is not only nothing, but less than nothing, since it is privation of light." ( Ascent Bk 1, Ch. IV, n. 3)

And "All the being of creation, then, compared with the infinite Being of God, is nothing." (Ascent Bk 1, Ch. IV, n. 4)

And "Wherefore the soul that is ravished by the graces and beauties of the creatures has only supreme misery and unattractiveness in the eyes of God... And therefore the soul that sets its heart upon the good things of the world is supremely evil in the eyes of God." (Ascent, Bk 1, Ch. IV, n. 4)

Don't these quotes prove that John of the Cross had a negative view of creation? Is there someone who can defend him against this accusation? Why don't you try?

1. St. John of the Cross was both a poet and a writer; indeed, he was, in some ways, more a poet than a writer because his poems came first, and his prose works followed as explanations of them. So reading St. John's poems is a good way to begin or renew your acquaintance with him.

The poems, especially The Dark Night and The Spiritual Canticle, will let us glimpse something of the mystery of divine union that was at the heart of John's life and guided all he did. St. John wrote four major prose works: The Ascent of Mt. Carmel, and its companion The Dark Night of the Soul, The Spiritual Canticle and The Living Flame of Love.

2. Problems reading St. John of the Cross. John of the Cross has a reputation for sometimes having a negative attitude and depressing his readers. It comes from his very strong statements about detachment: Give up this! Give up that!  Seek no pleasure in anything! This situation has certainly not be helped by new readers who jump right into The Ascent of Mt. Carmel instead of savoring the beauty of his poems first. Both the Ascent and The Dark Night are filled with one of the most complete programs of detachment imaginable.

But it has to be understood correctly, and the key to that understanding is seeing the perspective from which he wrote. We are back to his poems again. They are exquisite love poems and eminently positive. It is as if he is standing on the top of the mount of perfection, or Mt. Carmel, and watching us trying to slowly and laboriously and often ineffectively climb the mountain. He wants to tell us how wonderful it is on the top, which he does in his poems, and in many places in his prose works, and he wants to give us practical instructions about how to reach the summit. He knows that there is nothing in this life as beautiful as the experience of love that takes place on that summit, and so he tells us again and again that it is foolish to let some disordered pleasures or persistent attachments get in the way of our ascent. All his negation, therefore, is in the service of the most positive goal of all, which is love.

Some new issues presented by Dr. Robert Hoftiezer, rjhoft@adelphia.net

Last year, as part of our contemplative prayer group, I was re-reading Juan de la Cruz and I was shocked at the amount of quasi-erotic content in what he wrote. It set me to thinking about the real basis of Western spirituality. I know there is an attempt of late to integrate Zen and Christian mysticism. However, in the light of what I believe the Christian process to be, I cannot see any relationship between them.

Several elements in the Christian mysticism of St. John lead me to believe that it is a mysticism of the unconscious.

1. The sense deprivation, which is part of the Western mystical process, leads to phenomena familiar to anyone who has read about the sense-deprivation experiments in years past. In the absence of stimuli and, I believe, in the absence of normal cognitive responses to external stimuli, the unconscious unloads the content of previous experiences spontaneously. This can give the impression that such experiences arise from outside of the psyche, but the nature of the material reported by the mystics is consistent with previously processed information; i.e., with their initial mental -- theological -- prejudices.

2. The displacement of affect -- libido, which is part of the way of negation, produces an amorphic, non-specific erotic environment that leads to ecstasies which, again, in the absence of any apparent action on the part of the subject, appear to arise from without. The result is an auto-erotic state in which the energy of the displaced libido arises spontaneously. Such ecstatic phenomena can also be brought about by prolonged periods of chanting. In any case, the nature of the "flights of divine love" bear all the earmarks of the language of the unconscious.

3. In defense of this suggestion is the fact that a certain sexual polymorphism resides in the unconscious of normal people. This is usually channeled into interpersonal sexuality. But, in the absence of such a sexual cathexis, the "libidinal energy" becomes dissociated from the ego, remaining in the unconscious from which, from time to time, it enters normal, waking consciousness.

4. Finally, the entire Christian process -- its emphasis on passivity, its dissociation of affect, its identification with specific noetic elements, its sense-response-deprivation, its suppression of the conative element of the psyche -- all point to the activities of the unconscious.

Another issue is the Western understanding of the loss of "ego." It was very instructive for me to read of Bernadette Roberts' experiences. Consistent with her Western Christian prejudice, she equates the loss of the sense of ego that she experienced with that of the Eastern mystics. But the phenomena she reports speak of an impoverishment of the ego, something totally inconsistent with the Eastern understanding. It is no accident that there is nothing in the East that corresponds to Western psychology. This is the logical consequence of seeing the mind as just another of the senses and not something of a separate order. The overcoming of ego in Zen, for example, is not the "loss" of ego, as Roberts reports, but an integration of ego within a wider context. When Dogen speaks of the "dropping off of mind and body," he is not referring to the "loss" of anything. Nor does the statement imply a cause-effect relationship, as if the event of dropping off "produced" the subsequent state of integration. For the Zennist, everything always remains as it was. There is no suppression of ego or thought. The shikantaza of the Soto school, which goes back to Dogen, has nothing to say about self or ego in the Western sense. The state of attentive presence, which is his zazen, is a "letting be." It is this state of noetic, conative, and affective permissiveness that allows the transformation called enlightenment to occur.

I fear that the entire program of integrating Eastern thought with Western practice is doomed to failure because of the fundamentally psychological approach of Western practitioners. The mysticism of John of the Cross is clearly a mysticism of the unconscious. There is nothing supernatural about it. The constant concern in the West with the suppression of the ego and with the displaced sexual impulse can only lead to a psychological state in which the individual lives out of his unconscious. Dr. Robert Hoftiezer, rjhoft@adelphia.net

Response from T.A.:

1. The sense deprivation, which is part of the Western mystical process, leads to phenomena familiar to anyone who has read about the sense-deprivation experiments in years past. In the absence of stimuli and, I believe, in the absence of normal cognitive responses to external stimuli, the unconscious unloads the content of previous experiences spontaneously. This can give the impression that such experiences arise from outside of the psyche, but the nature of the material reported by the mystics is consistent with previously processed information; i.e., with their initial mental -- theological -- prejudices.

(Response by T.A.)

I don't think anyone in the Western mystical process has denied that the above described natural operations connected with "unloading the unconsciouss" may take place for the reasons described. In fact, several Christina practitioners give lengthy explanations of "unloading" the unconscious in connection with centering prayer or in environments of limited sensory stimuli. This natural process is part of the "natural" development of the Old Man into the New Man of Jesus Christ. However, it is only a small part of the natural/supernatural process of transformation in charity.

2. The displacement of affect -- libido, which is part of the way of negation, produces an amorphic, non-specific erotic environment that leads to ecstasies which, again, in the absence of any apparent action on the part of the subject, appear to arise from without. The result is an auto-erotic state in which the energy of the displaced libido arises spontaneously. Such ecstatic phenomena can also be brought about by prolonged periods of chanting. In any case, the nature of the "flights of divine love" bear all the earmarks of the language of the unconscious.

(Response)

Once again, the state described as heightened sensitivity to erotic stimuli in an auto-erotic state can develop in the natural man just as it is so described. It may be brought about by chanting as suggested. Saints, like St Teresa of Avila would have no problem admitting this. However, the "flights of divine love" alluded to in a mystical context are far different from natural flights of love as she has explained time and again. The supernatural "living flame of love" described by St John of the Cross soars high above the natural, passionate or erotic love resulting from displacement of affect. For it is "spiritual," and therefore of infinite power and grandeur. It is as different from it as the Creator is from His creation. No one who has experienced it would ever mistake it for the erotic energy of the dispaced libido.

3. In defense of this suggestion is the fact that a certain sexual polymorphism resides in the unconscious of normal people. This is usually channeled into interpersonal sexuality. But, in the absence of such a sexual cathexis, the "libidinal energy" becomes dissociated from the ego, remaining in the unconscious from which, from time to time, it enters normal, waking consciousness.

(Response)

No one is denying that these natural processes take place in connection with the natural conscious and unconscious. Many directors in spiritual development are well aware of these accidental natural phenomena alluded to. However, they're irrelevant to the issue of the existence of the supernatural phenomena of true mysticism, and the transformation of charity which results in world-class saints like St Teresa, St John of the Cross, and St Francis of Assisi. The wind blows where it wills. And no one knows whence it comes or where it goes. And its no good trying to account for the Holy Spirit on the basis of spontaneous movements of natural libido.

4. Finally, the entire Christian process -- its emphasis on passivity, its dissociation of affect, its identification with specific noetic elements, its sense-response-deprivation, its suppression of the conative element of the psyche -- all point to the activities of the unconscious.

(Reply)

The entire Christian process will always involve all aspects of the natural man, including the unconscious, as he is transformed by supernatural grace into the New Man in Jesus Christ.

Another issue is the Western understanding of the loss of "ego." It was very instructive for me to read of Bernadette Roberts' experiences. Consistent with her Western Christian prejudice, she equates the loss of the sense of ego that she experienced with that of the Eastern mystics. But the phenomena she reports speak of an impoverishment of the ego, something totally inconsistent with the Eastern understanding. It is no accident that there is nothing in the East that corresponds to Western psychology. This is the logical consequence of seeing the mind as just another of the senses and not something of a separate order. The overcoming of ego in Zen, for example, is not the "loss" of ego, as Roberts reports, but an integration of ego within a wider context. When Dogen speaks of the "dropping off of mind and body," he is not referring to the "loss" of anything. Nor does the statement imply a cause-effect relationship, as if the event of dropping off "produced" the subsequent state of integration. For the Zennist, everything always remains as it was. There is no suppression of ego or thought. The shikantaza of the Soto school, which goes back to Dogen, has nothing to say about self or ego in the Western sense. The state of attentive presence, which is his zazen, is a "letting be." It is this state of noetic, conative, and affective permissiveness that allows the transformation called enlightenment to occur.

I fear that the entire program of integrating Eastern thought with Western practice is doomed to failure because of the fundamentally psychological approach of Western practitioners. The mysticism of John of the Cross is clearly a mysticism of the unconscious. There is nothing supernatural about it. The constant concern in the West with the suppression of the ego and with the displaced sexual impulse can only lead to a psychological state in which the individual lives out of his unconscious. Dr. Robert Hoftiezer, rjhoft@adelphia.net

(Reply)

The supernatural mysticism of St John of the Cross is something altogether different from a natural mysticism of the unconscious. To say there is nothing supernatural about it, is to betray the fact that, perhaps, one has never experienced the difference between the two for oneself. While no one denies that natural, physical love and passion between a man and woman provide a natural paradigm by which to gain an understanding in human terms of the supernatural "Living Flame of Love" between the spirit of man and the Spirit of God, the one is in the natural dimension and the other is supernatural. For example, in the Song of Songs of the Bible the love of the Bride and the Bridegroom give intimations of the nature of love between the Holy Spirit and the soul. However beautiful and passionate, this love remains at the natural level, no matter how magnified or displaced by whatever natural processes. The supernatural Love in the mysticism of St John of the Cross is the "Transforming Fire" which takes the "will" of the natural man and purifies it of human dross and alloy, through the dark nights of sense and spirit, thus providing a "deified" will of full conformity with the Will of God. This process brings forth individuals of strengthened ego with heroic virtue and charity capable of moving mountains and changing the world forever. Mother Teresa and St Francis of Assisi are just two examples. I'm afraid "displaced libido" and "heightened sensitiviy to erotic stimuli," however interesting in their own right, are in another dimension from the supernatural power involved in this process, and have only incidental relevance in a discussion of what is required in this context.(T.A.)

Editor's response: