Day at Denver Seminary

Today I was sitting in my spiritual formations class in a discussion of the older spiritual writings/classics. I don't pretend to be the incredible intellect nor the most well read. I've read Imitation and loved it. I've read City of God and Confessions by Augustine and been challenged and transformed. But I generally have left more of those major works to men much wiser than I. However, I was astonished at the lack of interest from the Conservative Evangelical students there that responded.

It would seem that the majority of students (Or at least the vocal students being broken from their Christian Consumerism) had little or no knowledge of anything previously written and were troubled at the thought of thinking outside of their evangelical box. As if C.S. Lewis is a patroned saint or this Willard guy I've never heard of before today.

I recognize my own faults and will be happy to look up Willard and I realize that Lewis had some amazing works of literature and Christian Growth. But, we discussed the mystics for 20-30 minutes today and what defines a mystic. An entire back row of students disagreed that the mystics had anything to offer us in our spiritual growth. They became indignant to that very fact. So let me make a general start on mysticism and I'll be happy to have people comment on that issue as well.

Mysticism*: n.
1. a. Immediate consciousness of the transcendent or ultimate reality or God.
b. The experience of such communion as described by mystics.
2. A belief in the existence of realities beyond perceptual or intellectual apprehension that are central to being and directly accessible by subjective experience.
3. Vague, groundless speculation.

For the intent of this discussion, we will go with a soft-core version of Mysticism. Since hard-core Mysticism (as seen in 1.a. and Charismatic's favorite son, Phil Jackson)is the basis of Buddhism. We will go with #2 for our definition.

The basis for the majority of Mystic writing came during the middle ages and even late into and through the Reformation. A time when having a subjective experience was not in line with what the mainline church was about. I love this line...
"A belief in the existence of realities beyond perceptual or intellectual apprehension that are central to being..."

Perhaps the majority of Denver Seminary students are of the Head and Hands only model of Christianity. (IE, if it's not in the Bible, if I can't grasp it in my hands, then it's not God) But what a shallow way of living this amazing life with the Almighty. After all, I realize that my heart, my experience, and my soul are far greater and able to grasp more than my tiny mind could ever conceive. After all, how would your mind grasp the concept of love? Is it a chemical imbalance? Or perhaps an emotional response to certain external factors?

I'd rather think that the matters of love, of the Almighty or of matters of the soul cannot be accurately explained by meer logic and words. It is something that has to be experienced...THAT IS CENTRAL TO BEING.

More to come...