Commonwealth Magazine, Issue July 4, 1947.
By Thomas Merton
The term “contemplative life” is one that is much mistreated. It is more often used than defined, and that is why arguments about the respective merits of “active” and ”contemplative” orders generally end nowhere. In the present article, I am not talking about the contemplative orders, but about the contemplative life. It is a life that can be led and, in fact, must eventually be led by every good Christian. It is the life for which we were created, and which will eventually be our everlasting joy in heaven. By the grace of Christ we can begin to lead that life even on earth, and many in fact do so begin. Some of them are in cloisters, because the vows and rules of religious orders and congregations make the necessary work of preparation easy and, as it were, almost a matter of course. But many more “contemplatives” are out in the world. A lot of them may be found in places like Harlem and wherever people suffer, and perhaps many of these have never even heard the word “contemplative.” And yet, on the other hand, not all of those who are in contemplative orders are contemplatives. Through their own fault they miss the end of their vocation.
The contemplative life is a life entirely occupied with God—with love and knowledge of God. It can be considered from three points of view, as it were in three degrees. There is first of all possible a kind of natural contemplation of God—that of the artist, the philosopher, and of the most advanced pagan religions. Then there is the contemplative life in the usual sense of the word: a life in which a baptised Christian, making full use of all the means which the Church puts at his disposal: sacraments, Liturgy, penance, prayer, meditation, spiritual reading, and so on—strives to conform his will with God’s will and to see and love God in all things and thus to dispose himself for union with Him. This is active contemplation, in which grace indeed is the principle of all the supernatural value and ordination of our acts, but in which much of the initiative belongs to our own powers, prompted and sustained by grace. This form of the contemplative life prepares us for contemplation properly so called: the life of infused or passive or mystical contemplation.
Infused contemplation is nothing but the fullness of the Christian life—the flowering of grace and the gifts and beatitudes which perfect the work of the three theological virtues.
Far from being something esoteric and dangerous, infused contemplation is given us as the normal term of the Christian life even on earth. Omnis qui ad Dominum convertitur contemplativam vitam desiderat said Saint Gregory the Great, and he was using contemplation in our sense: to live on the desire of God alone; to have one’s mind divested of all earthly things and united, in so far as human weakness permits, with Christ. And he adds that the contemplative life begins on earth in order to continue, more perfectly, in heaven. Saint Thomas echoed him with his famous phrase: quaedam inchoatio beatitudinis. Saint Bonaventure goes farther than any of the other Doctors of the Church in his insistence that all Christians should desire infused contemplation. And in his second conference on the Hexaemeron, applying Christ’s words in Matthew xii, 42, he says that the Queen of the South who left her own land and traveled far to hear the wisdom of Solomon will rise up in judgment against our generation which refuses the treasures of infused wisdom, preferring the far lesser riches of worldly wisdom and philosophy.
Infused contemplation is an experimental knowledge of God’s goodness “tasted” and “possessed” by a vital contact in the depths of the soul. By infused love, we are given an immediate grasp of God’s own substance, and rest in the obscure and profound sense of His presence and transcendent actions within our inmost selves, yielding ourselves altogether to the work of His transforming Spirit.
Now whether we speak of contemplation as active or passive, one thing is evident: it brings us into the closest contact with the one subject matter that is truly worthy of a Christian poet: God as He is seen by faith, by revelation, or in the intimate experience of the soul illumined by the gifts of the Holy Ghost.
Consider, for instance, what a tremendous mine of literary inspiration is in the liturgical life. The liturgy itself contains the greatest literature, not only from Scripture, but from the genius of the Patristic and Middle Ages. The liturgy stands at the crossroads of the natural and supernatural lives, and exploits all the possibilities of both in order to bring out every possible meaning and implication that is in them with respect to our salvation and the praise of God. It surrounds those founts of all supernatural vitality, the Sacraments, with a music that is perfect in its dignity, and ceremonies that are most meaningful by reason of their tremendous dramatic simplicity, not to mention all the resources of pictorial and plastic art still unknown in this land which has never yet possessed a Chartres or an Assisi.
The liturgy is, then, not only a school of literary taste and a mine of marvellous subjects, but it is infinitely more: it is a great sacramental built around the six Sacraments which surround the greatest Sacrament Who is Christ Himself dwelling among us even unto the consummation of the world.
Christ on the Cross is the fount of all art because He is the Word, the fount of all grace and wisdom. He is the centre of everything, of the whole economy of the natural and supernatural orders. Everything points to this anointed King of Creation Who is the splendor of the eternal light and the mirror of the Godhead without stain. He is the “image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature… in Him were all things created, by Him and in Him… He is before all and by Him all things consist… in Whom i t hath pleased the Father that all things should dwell… for in Him dwelleth all the fullness of the Godhead corporeally,” that in all things He may hold the primacy. (Colossians, I and II)
And yet Catholic poets and writers generally, although they might possess the key to these treasures through a love of Christ that would not shrink from the self-denial required to live a complete and integral Christian life in defiance of the standards of comfort-loving American materialism, prefer to struggle along in the wake of indifferent and mediocre secular models, singing the same old cracked tune that the Georgians inherited from Tennyson and Swinburne and of which even the children of our modern world have long since grown tired.
Of course, it is no wonder that we can’t all live like a Saint John of the Cross. But we might at least read him! He is one of the greatest Catholic poets. How many Catholics have even heard of him? And yet every time you open a Catholic anthology you will come across something by Alexander Pope who was baptised a Catholic, indeed, and died one, but who wrote as a deist. Contemplation would at least open our eyes to the value of our own tradition, even if we did not have the courage to follow our models to the limit in order to come somewhere near the intensity and perfection of their writing.
No Christian poetry worthy of the name has been written by anyone who was not in some degree a contemplative. But that does not mean that every contemplative is necessarily a great poet. Poetry is an art, a natural skill, a virtue of the practical intellect and no matter how great a subject we may have in the experience of infused contemplation, and we will not be able to put it into words if we do not have the proper command of our medium. That is true. But let us assume that a man already has this natural gift. If the inspiration is helpless without a correspondingly effective technique, technique is barren without inspiration.
Christ is our inspiration, and Christ is at the centre of the contemplative life. Therefore, it would seem fairly evident that the one thing that will most contribute to the perfection of Catholic literature in general and poetry in particular will be for our writers and poets to start leading lives of active contemplation. In other words, to lead the full Christian life in so far as they can in their state. That means not necessarily entering a monastery, but aspiring to perfection by the use of all the manifold means that the Church puts at our disposal. It means a solid integration of one’s work and religion and family life and recreations in one vital harmonious unity with Christ at its centre. The liturgical life is the most obvious example, but it is hard enough to find a parish where the liturgical life is anything more than a bare skeleton. Nevertheless, any man or woman in the world who wants to can make a very fair attempt at becoming an active contemplative and even dispose himself for the graces of infused prayer. And the best disposition is an efficacious desire to arrive at a deep and intimate and personal and loving knowledge of God through Christ.
If such a desire is efficacious, it will not shrink from facts and penance and sacrifices; it will seek them. It will not be bored with prayer, but prayer will become the life of our soul, and we will be able to carry on affective prayer everywhere. We will read Scripture and above all the contemplative saints—John of the Cross, Teresa of Avila, John Ruysbroeck, Bonaventure, and so on. And God will not make too many difficulties about giving us His wisdom….
It is obvious, then, that contemplation has much to offer poetry. But can poetry offer anything in return, to contemplation? Can the poetic sense help us towards infused contemplation, and, if so, how far along the way?
We have said that the poetic sense may be a remote disposition for mystical prayer. This needs explanation. And the first thing that needs to be stressed is the essential dignity of aesthetic experience. It is, in itself, a very high gift, though only in the natural order. It is a gift which very many people have never received, and which others, having received it, have allowed to spoil or become atrophied within them through neglect and misuse.
To many people, the enjoyment of art is nothing more than a sensible and emotional thrill. They look at a picture, and if it stimulates one or another of their sense-appetites they are pleased. On a hot day they like to look at a picture of mountains or the sea because it makes them feel cool. They like paintings of dogs that you could almost pat. But naturally they soon tire of art, under those circumstances. They turn aside to pat a real dog, or they go down the street to an air-conditioned movie, to give their senses another series of jolts. Obviously for such people art is not even a remote preparation for even the lowest degree of contemplation.
But a genuine aesthetic experience is something which transcends not only the sensible order (in which, however, it has its beginning) but also that of reason itself. It is a supra-rational intuition of the latent perfection of things. Its immediacy outruns the speed of reasoning and leaves all analysis far behind. In the natural order, as Jacques Maritain has often insisted, it is an analogue of the mystical experience which it resembles and imitates from afar. Its mode of apprehension is that of “connaturality”—it reaches out to grasp the inner reality, the vital substance of its object, by a kind of affective identification of itself with it. It rests in the perfection of things by a kind of union which somewhat resembles the rest of the soul in its immediate, affective contact with God in the obscurity of mystical prayer. A true artist can contemplate a picture for hours, and it is a real contemplation, too. So close is the resemblance between these two experiences that a poet like Blake could almost confuse the two and make them merge into one another as if they belonged to the same order of things. And yet there is an abyss between them.
Nowhere has this resemblance between the experiences of the artist and of the mystic been better treated than in the long and important article on “Art and Spirituality,” by Fr. M. Leonard, S.J., in the “Dictionnaire de Spiritualité, this theologian stresses the dignity of the aesthetic intuition practically to the limit. He gives it everything that it is ontologically able to stand. He insists that the highest experience of the artist penetrates not only beyond the sensible surface of things into their inmost reality, but even beyond that to God Himself. More than that, the analogy with mystical experience is deeper and closer still because, as he says, the intuition of the artist sets in motion the very same psychological processes which accompany infused contemplation. This would seem to be too much: but no, it is not. It fits in with the psychology of Saint Augustine and Saint Bona venture and the latter’s notion of contemplation per speculum, passing through the mirror of created things to God, even if that mirror may happen to be our own soul.
The Augustinian psychology, which forms the traditional substratum of Christian mystical theology, distinguishes between an inferior and superior soul. Of course, this is only a manner of speaking. There is only one soul, a simple spiritual substance, undivided, and indivisible. And yet the soul in so far as it acts through its faculties, making decisions and practical judgments concerning temporal external things, is called “inferior.” The “superior” soul is the same soul, but now considered as the principle or actus primus of these other diverse and multiple acts of the faculties which as it were flow from this inner principle. Only the superior soul is strictly the image of God within us. And if we are to contemplate God at all, this internal image must be reformed by grace, and then we must enter within ourselves by recollection, withdrawing our faculties from external things into this inner sanctuary which is the substance of the soul itself. The majority of people, even those who possess the gift of sanctifying grace, never enter into this inward self, which is an abode of silence and peace and where the diversified activities of the intellect and will are collected, so to speak, into one intense and smooth and spiritualised activity which far exceeds in its fruitfulness the plodding efforts of reason working on external reality with its analyses and syllogisms.
It is here that contemplation really begins. It is into this substance or ”centre” of the soul, when it is suitably purified of images and attachments to sensible things, that the obscure light of infused contemplation will be poured by God giving us experimental contact with Himself without the medium of sense species, which are, in any case, utterly incapable of apprehending Him.
And yet even in the natural order, without attaining to God in us, the aesthetic experience introduces us into this interior sanctuary of the soul and to its inexpressible simplicity and economy and energy and fruitfulness.
Obviously, then, when the natural contemplation of the artist or the metaphysician has already given a man a taste of the peaceful intoxication which is tasted in the supra-rational intuitions of this interior self, the way is already well prepared for infused contemplation. And if God should grant that grace, the person so favoured will be much better prepared to recognise it, and to cooperate with God’s action within him. And this, as a matter of fact, is a tremendous advantage. The artist, the poet, the metaphysician is, then, in some sense already naturally prepared and disposed to remove some of the principal obstacles to the light of infused contemplation. He will be less tempted than the ordinary man to reach out for sensible satisfactions and imaginable thrills. He will be more ready to keep himself detached from the level of feeling and emotionalism which so easily make the devotion of less wary souls degenerate into sentimentality. The mere fact of the artist or poet’s good taste, which should belong to him by virtue of his art, will help him to avoid some of the evils that tend to corrupt religious experience before it has a chance to take root and grow in the soul.
If only we realised how much the work of the Holy Ghost is impeded in our souls by our in satiable emotional vulgarity—a vulgarity which we innocently bring with us into the House of God and coddle next to our heart our whole life long, never suspecting that it is a dead and poisoned thing. And the saddest of all is that this domestic enemy is nourished and encouraged by so much of the so-called pious “art” that infects the atmosphere of the Church in so many quarters. If there were no other proof of the infinite patience of God with men, a very good one could be found in His toleration of the pictures that are painted of Him and of the noise that proceeds from musical instruments under the pretext of being in His “honour.”
Mystical contemplation is absolutely beyond the reach of man’s activity. There is nothing he can do to obtain it by himself. It is a pure gift of God. God gives it to whom He wills, when He wills, and in the way and degree in which He wills. By cooperating with the work of ordinary grace we can-and, if we really mean to love God, we must-constantly grow and progress in charity and union with Him by our good works. But no amount of generosity on our part, no amount of effort, no amount of sacrifice will necessarily and immediately gain us progress in mystical prayer. That is a work that must be done by God acting as the “principal agent” (the term is that of Saint John of the Cross). If He is the principal agent, there is another agent: we. But our part is simply to consent and to receive, and all the rest that we can do amounts to the more or less negative task of avoiding the obstacles to God’s action, and keeping our own selfishness and sensuality out of His way. Saint Bonaventure tells us in many places that prayer and ardent desire can persuade God to give us this gift, and that “industria” on our part can open the way for His action. The term industria stands for active purification, and Saint Bonaventure means, by that, precisely the same thing that Saint John of the Cross talks about all the rough the “Ascent of Mount Carmel,” namely the voiding and emptying of the soul, clearing it of all images, all likenesses of and attachments to created things so that it may be clean and pure to receive the obscure light of God’s own presence. The soul must be stripped of all its desires for natural satisfactions, no matter how high, how noble or how excellent in themselves. As long as it rests in creatures, it cannot possess God and be possessed by Him, for the love of the soul for creatures is darkness in the sight of God. If we love created things and depend on them and trust in them rather than in God, it will be once again a case of God’s light shining in the darkness, “and the darkness did not comprehend it.” (John 1.5)
There is no need to insist on this, since it is the common doctrine of Christian mystical theologians. The one big obstacle to “unitive” or “connatural” or “affective” knowledge of God by infused contemplation (the terms are those of Saint Thomas and his followers) is attachment to human reasoning and analysis and discourse that proceeds by abstraction from sense images, and by syllogising, to conclusions.
In other words, a man cannot at the same time fly in an airplane and walk along the ground. He must do one or the other. And if he insists on walking along the ground—all right, it is no sin. But it will take him much longer and cost him much more effort to get to his destination, and he will have a much more limited view of things along his way. And the even greater obstacle to union with God by pure and infused love, or wisdom, is love of one’s own satisfactions, attachment to one’s own pleasure, the desire to rest in one’s own achievements and in the work of one’s own powers and will. If God is to do the work of infusing contemplation into our souls, we must not be busy with our own natural activity, which, ipso facto excludes and prevents this complete freedom of action which God demands in us.
All He wants from the mystic is cooperation, peaceful consent, and a blind trust in Him: for all this time, since the soul does not act, it remains blind and in darkness, having no idea where it is going or what is being done, and tasting satisfaction that is, at first, extremely tenuous and ineffable and obscure. The reason is, of course, that the soul is not yet sufficiently spiritualised to be able to grasp and appreciate what is going on within it. It remains with nothing but the vaguest and most general sense that God is really and truly present and working there—a sense which is fraught with a greater certitude than anything it has ever experienced before. And yet if we stop to analyse the experience, or if we make a move to increase its intensity by a natural act, the whole thing will evade our grasp and we may lose it altogether.
Now it is precisely here that the aesthetic instinct changes its colours and, from being a precious gift becomes a fatal handicap. If the intuition of the poet naturally leads him into the inner sanctuary of his soul, it is for a special purpose in the natural order: when the poet enters into himself, it is in order to reflect upon his inspiration and to clothe it with a special and splendid form and then return to display it to those outside. And here the radical difference between the artist and the mystic begins to be seen. The artist enters into himself in order to work. For him, the “superior” soul is a forge where inspiration kindles a fire of white heat, a crucible for the transformation of natural images into new, created forms. But the mystic enters into himself, not in order to work but to pass through the centre of his own soul and loose himself in the mystery and secrecy and infinite, transcendent reality of God living and working within him.
Consequently, if the mystic happens to be, at the same time, an artist, when prayer calls him within himself to the secrecy of God’s presence, his art will be tempted to start working and producing and studying the “creative” possibilities of this experience. And therefore immediately the whole thing runs the risk of being frustrated and destroyed. The artist will be cheated of a gift of tremendous and supernatural worth, and be left with nothing—but the experience of an artist. And instead of passing through the sanctuary of his own soul into the abyss of the infinite actuality of God Himself , he will remain there a moment, only to emerge again into the exterior world of multiple created things whose variety once more d1ss1pates his energies until they are lost in perplexity and dissatisfaction.
There is, therefore, a tremendous danger that one who has the natural gift of artistic intuition and creation will be constantly cheated of the infinitely superior gift of the union of the soul with God which surpasses all understanding. He may well receive the first taste of infused prayer, for, as Saint John of the Cross says, that is granted to relatively many souls, and often quite soon in their spiritual life, especially in a monastery : but, because of this tragic promethean tendency to exploit every experience as material for “creation” he may remain there all his life on the threshold, never entering in to the banquet, but always running back into the street to tell the passersby of the wonderful music he has heard coming from the inside of the palace of the King!
What, then, is the conclusion? That poetry can, indeed, help to bring us rapidly through that part of the journey to contemplation that is called active: but when we are entering the realm of true contemplation, where eternal happiness begins, it may turn around and bar our way.
In such an event, there is only one course for the poet to take, for his own individual sanctification: the ruthless and complete sacrifice of his art. This is the simplest and the safest and the most obvious way and one which will only appeal to someone who does not realise the infinite distance between the gifts of nature and those of grace, between the natural and the supernatural order, time and eternity, man and God. For the aesthetic experience, like everything else temporal, fasts a moment and passes away. Perhaps it enriches the soul with a fuller natural capacity for further experience of the same order but all such experience will end at death. Mystical prayer, on the contrary, enriches man a hundredfold more both in time and in eternity. It purifies the soul and loads it with supernatural merits, enlarging man’s powers and capacities to absorb the infinite rivers of light which will one day be his beatitude. More than anything else it forms Christ in the soul. We become the sons of God, says Saint Thomas, (in Matthew) in so far as we participate in the likeness of God’s only-begotten and natural Son, Who is begot ten Wisdom, Sapientia genita. And therefore by participating in the Gift of Wisdom man arrives at sonship of God. And Saint Bonaventure therefore adds that wisdom, (that is, mystical contemplation) is the crowning of Christ’s work in souls on earth. Haec sapientia reddit hominem divinum et Christus venit hanc docere. This wisdom makes man divine, and it is this that Christ came on earth to teach. (Coll. II in Hexaemeron.)
The sacrifice of an art would seem small enough price to pay for this pearl of great price.” But there is a further complication, which we can only adumbrate, before closing this article. What if one is morally certain that God wills him to continue writing anyway? That is, what if one’s religious superiors make it a matter of formal obedience to pursue one’s art, for some special purpose like the good of souls? That will not take away distractions, or make God abrogate the laws of the spiritual life. But we can console ourselves with Saint Thomas Aquinas that it is more meritorious to share the fruits of contemplation with others than it is merely to enjoy them ourselves. And certainly, when it comes to communicating some idea of the delights of contemplation, the poet is, of all men, the one who is least at a loss for a means to express what is essentially inexpressible.
Thomas Merton was the author of “Man in the Divided Sea,” and many other books. He was a member of the Trappist Community at Gethsemani, KY. He died December 10, 1968.