STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM.

The difference between the two interpretations may be seen if we compare the division of ascetico-mystical theology used until the second half of the eighteenth century with that given by several authors who have written since that time. It is evident, for example, if we compare the treatise of Vallgornera, O. P., Mystica theologia divi Thomae (1662), with the two works of Scaramelli, S. J., Direttorio ascetico (1751) and Direttorio mistico.

Vallgornera follows- more or less closely the Carmelite, Philip of the Trinity. He likens the division given by him to that used by previous authors, and confirms it by appeal to certain characteristic texts of St. John of the Cross on the moment at which the passive nights of the senses and of the spirit generally make their appearance. [119] He divides his treatise for contemplative souls into three parts:

1. Of the purgative way, proper to beginners, in which he treats of the active purification of the external and internal senses, the passions, the intellect and the will by mortification, meditation and prayer, and finally of the passive purification of the senses, where infused contemplation begins and leads the soul on to the illuminative way, as St. John of the Cross explains at the beginning of the Dark Night. [120]

2. Of the illuminative way, proper to proficients, where, after a preliminary chapter on the divisions of contemplation, the writer treats of the gifts of the Holy Ghost and of infused contemplation, which proceeds especially from the gifts of understanding and wisdom, and which is declared to be a legitimate object of desire for all spiritual souls, as being morally necessary for the complete perfection of the Christian life. This second part of the work, after several articles dealing with extraordinary graces (visions, revelations, interior speech) concludes with a chapter of nine articles on the passive purification of the spirit, which marks the transition to the unitive way. This, likewise, is the teaching of St. John of the Cross. [121]

3. Of the unitive way, proper to the perfect, where the author deals with the intimate union of the contemplative soul with God and with its degrees, up to the transforming union.

Vallgornera considers this division to be the traditional one, and to be truly in harmony with the doctrine of the Fathers, with the principles of St. Thomas and the teaching of St. John of the Cross, and with that of the great mystics who have written on the three periods of the spiritual life, and on the manner in which the transition is generally made from one to another.

Quite different is the division given by Scaramelli and the authors who follow him.

In the first place Scaramelli treats of Ascetics and Mystics, not in the same work, but in two distinct works. The Direttorio ascetico, twice as long as the second work, comprises four treatises: (I) The means of perfection; (2) the obstacles (purgative way); (3) the proximate dispositions to Christian perfection, consisting of the moral virtues in the perfect degree (the way of proficients); (4) the essential perfection of the Christian, consisting of the theological virtues and especially of charity (the love of conformity in the case of the perfect).

This treatise of Ascetics hardly mentions the gifts of the Holy Ghost. And yet according to the common teaching of spiritual writers the high degree of perfection in the moral and theological virtues which is here described is unattainable without these gifts.

The Direttorio mistico consists of five treatises:

(1) An Introduction, on the gifts of the Holy Ghost and the gratiae gratis datae;

(2) on acquired and infused contemplation, for which, as Scaramelli admits, the gifts are sufficient;

(3) on the degrees of obscure infused contemplation, from passive recollection to the transforming union. (Here, in Chapter XXXII, Scaramelli admits that several authors teach 1 Ch xiv. that infused contemplation may be desired humbly by all spiritual souls; but he comes to the conclusion that in practice it is better not to desire it unless one has received a special call to it: 'Altiora te ne quaesieris'); [122]

(4) on the degrees of distinct infused contemplation (visions and extraordinary interior words);

(5) of the passive purifications of the senses and of the spirit.

It is surprising not to find until the end of this treatise on Mystics a description of the passive purgation of the senses, a purgation which, for St. John of the Cross and the authors above quoted, marks the entrance into the illuminative way.

The difference between this new way of dividing ascetico-mystical theology and the old way obviously arises from the fact that the old authors, unlike the modern ones, maintained that all truly spiritual souls can humbly desire and ask of God the grace of the infused contemplation of the mysteries of the faith: the Incarnation and Passion of Christ, Holy Mass and Eternal Life, mysteries which are so many manifestations of the infinite goodness of God. They considered this supernatural and confused contemplation to be morally necessary for that union with God in which the full perfection of the Christian life consists.

Hence it may be wondered whether the new division, as propounded for example by Scaramelli, does not diminish both the unity and the sublimity of the perfect spiritual life. When Ascetics are separated from Mystics in this way, do we sufficiently preserve the unity of the whole which is divided? A good division, if it is not to be superficial and accidental, if it is to be based upon a necessary foundation, must repose upon the definition of the whole which is to be divided, upon the nature of that whole. And the whole in question is the life of grace, called by tradition

'the grace of the virtues and gifts'; [123]

for the seven gifts of the Holy Ghost, since they are connected with charity, are part of the supernatural organism, [124] and, as St. Thomas teaches, are necessary for salvation, a fortiori for perfection. [125]

Similarly, the new conception surely diminishes the sublimity of evangelical perfection, since this is dealt with under the head of Ascetics, without mention of the gifts of the Holy Ghost, and without mention of the infused contemplation of the mysteries of faith and the union with God which results from that contemplation. While the new method of treatment emphasizes the necessity of ascetics, does it not at the same time degrade it, weakening the motives for the practice of mortification and for the exercise of the virtues, because it loses sight of the divine intimacy to which the whole of this work should eventually lead? Does it throw sufficient light upon the meaning of the trials, those prolonged periods of aridity, which generally mark the transition from one stage of the spiritual life to the other? Does not the new conception diminish also the importance and value of mysticism, which, if it is separated thus from asceticism, seems to become a luxury in the spiritual life of a few favoured ones, and a luxury which is not without its dangers? Finally, and above all, does not this conception debase the illuminative and unitive ways, by regarding them simply from the ascetical point of view? Is it possible for these two ways normally to exist without the exercise of the gifts of the Holy Ghost, proportionate to the exercise of charity and the other infused virtues? Are there six ways (three ascetical ways which are ordinary, and three mystical ways which are extraordinary), and not only three ways, three periods in the spiritual life, as the ancients maintained? Does it not seem that, if ascetics is divorced from the illuminative and unitive ways, it becomes simply an abstract study of the moral and theological virtues? Or, if the progress and perfection of these virtues is treated in concrete-as is done by Scaramelli -- is it not manifest, according to the teaching of St. John of the Cross, that this perfection is unattainable without the passive purifications and the operation of the gifts of the Holy Ghost? On this matter we shall do well to remember the words of St. Teresa:

'According to certain books we ought to be indifferent to the evil which is spoken of us, and even rejoice more thereat than if we were well spoken of; we ought to make little of honour, and be detached from our neighbour... and many other things of the same sort. In my opinion these are pure gifts of God, these are supernatural graces.' [126]

In order better to preserve the unity and sublimity of the interior life, such as the Gospels and the epistles reveal it to us, we propose the division which follows. It accords with that of the great majority of authors who wrote before the second half of the eighteenth century, and, by including an imperfect form of the illuminative and unitive ways, mentioned by St. John. of the Cross, [127] it also safeguards that portion of truth which, in our opinion, the more recent conception contains.