“v.“ ,v

 

 

 

 

 

A SEW 8% WE ‘Jifiifii‘é TREE 3393
EN kéEBiEVAS. HTEEAYBE’E
WW SPEEIHC AFPHEM'EGN TB THE PEARL

DOGTOR OF PHELOSOF’HY

MECE‘iéGAN STRTE UNEVERS TY

THERESE CQYWE. 3.8M.

1974

 

¢._-—_— w _“/

.t. ‘

 

This is to certify that the

thesis entitled

A Study of the Vision Tradition in
Medieval Literature with
Specific Application to The Pearl

presented by
Sister Therese Coyne
has been accepted towards fulfillment

of the requirements for

Ph . D. degree in Erglish

.x/i: \ .
L7»? / W/Z'I-ms

 

 

Major professor

Date December 16JL 1974

 

 

 

 

 

h—-—__

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

.v
-‘ o4...

'-.v....¢..

 

 

0“
...
"I n,‘

bl.‘ -
EA

.'~‘.

 

.. “
‘ ' «l
.w‘

 

 

 

 

 

 

ABSTRACT
A STUDY OF THE VISION TRADITION

IN MEDIEVAL LITERATURE
WITH SPECIFIC APPLICATION TO THE PEARL

By

Therese Coyne, R.S.M.

The Pearl, a fourteenth century poem written in the dialect of
the North-West Midlands of England, has a considerable body of criticism
surrounding it. Although the criticism ordinarily refers to the poem as a
dream vision, The Pearl contains passages which indicate strongly that
the unknown author was working out of a tradition which existed side by
side and intertwined with that which fostered the dream vision convention.
I use the term vision tradition to designate this parallel development.

In naming a second tradition, I propose a real difference between
a "dream" and a "vision. " After establishing the basis on which The

Pearl can be considered a vision, I pursued internal evidence of the poem

 

to relate it to ecstasy, to vision per se, to mystical contemplation, and

to spiritual marriage .

The methods and techniques used in this investigation are as
follows. Careful reading of scriptural and patrological texts established
the existence of visions in the canonical and extra-canonical literature
of early Christian times. MoreOver, common commentaries on the scrip-

tural texts were found in the Glosga Ordinaria. The glosses led to the

discovery and careful reading of Saint Augustine's basic treatment of the

 

 

 

 

 

-- .

,.1" “I
..

'- 1“...
l I

q

. .299.“

.-.‘w ”J-

.,~

qr
'~.."‘

 

1,. .

 

..'

 

 

 

Therese Coyne, R.S.M.

whole subject of visions in the twelfth book of De Genesi ad litteram.

 

The understanding and discussion of visions in the context de-
scribed were found to continue through the whole of the Middle Ages in
the writings of the mystics. In particular, St. Gregory the Great and
St. Bernard of Clairvaux were studied because of their great influence
from the time of Augustine until the composition of The Pearl. In addition,

extra-canonical literature was discovered to be a major conduit of the :

EL.

vision tradition, especially in the very influential Visio Pauli. Minor

 

works and further writings of medieval mystics were also examined. A :

 

In addition, a study of the meaning of the state of ecstasy was H‘
pursued since the vision in The Pearl is indicated as having occurred in
this state. Stress was placed upon the work of Joseph Maréchal called
fie Psychology of Mysticism in this part of the thesis.

Finally, since there are explicit references in The Pearl to the
idea of spiritual marriage, this concept was traced from its scriptural
beginnings through the major work of Bernard of Clairvaux on the subject.

The last section of the study applied the implications of the vi—
sion tradition upon the understanding of The Pearl to some of the chief
modern criticism of the poem.

The major data used were the poem, The Pearl; the Vulgate ver—
sion of the Bible which is the major source of the poem; the Glossa Or-

dinaria in the Patrologia Latina: the works of St. Augustine, St. Gregory,

 

and St. Bernard of Clairvaux, especially with reference to visions; the

relevant extra—canonical visions; and the modem criticism of The Pearl.

 

I
w‘" A4

n
Jenny-I

y‘l~‘~A‘
.

Addonnfl'

,.....n
. .v

 

 

a
'VV“
-
.n u.-
. u:
u I..

\-

 

 

 

Therese Coyne, R. S . M .

The major findings of this study propose, first of all, that IE
Begishould be read as a poem which records the experiences of a Vi-
sionary and not of a dreamer. Second, the poem is a product of a long
tradition of the use of visions in sacred and profane literature. This
tradition involved a knowledge of ecstasy and its relationship to visions,
especially the relationship of visions to the gift of mystical experience .
The meaning of The Pearl is enriched when it is considered as a product
of a mystical age.

Another major finding of this study is the need for a more pre-
cise use and differentiation of the words ”dream" and ”vision" — in regard
to many works of the Medieval period. Considerable confusion exists
in some major criticism because this distinction is not recognized.

Finally, reading The Pearl as a product of an age in which ec-
stasy, vision, mystical contemplation, and spiritual marriage were living
realities enables the reader to perceive the poem on its own terms and as
a Product of its own age. Such interpretation helps the reader recognize
that part of the richness and depth of the poem comes from the probability
that the Visionary of The Pearl was in actual contact with sacred realities
and that his broken, sorrowing spirit was healed explicitly because of his

vision experience .

nil

 

A STUDY OF THE VISION TRADITION
IN MEDIEVAL LITERATURE

WITH SPECIFIC APPLICATION TO THE PEARL

BY

Therese Coyne , R.S . M .

A DISSERTATION

Submitted to
Michigan State University
in partial fulfillment of the requirements
for the degree of

DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY

Department of English

1974

I“!

 

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

It gives me a great deal of pleasure to have the opportunity to f“
formally acknowledge the encouragement and help of Kathleen Healy, R.S.M. , 1
teacher and friend .

Professors William W. Heist and Iohn A. Yunck have generously , J

h

acted as readers of this dissertation. I thank them for their interest and
criticism.

Professor Arnold Williams has been a catalyst in my intellectual
and personal growth because he cares for learning, continually pursues
knowledge, and shares his wisdom both spontaneously and joyfully. I am
indebted to him for the inception and completion of this study. I thank
him for his patient help, and his perceptive encouragement that led me to

develop my best potential.

ii

II.

III.

IV.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

INTRODUCTION ......................

ECSTASY AS IT OCCURS IN SCRIPTURAL AND MYSTICAL

SOURCES WITHIN THE VISION TRADITION ........

VISIONS IN SCRIPTURAL AND APOCRYPHAL SOURCES

AS THEY CONSTITUTE THE VISION TRADITION ......

CONTEMPLATION IN MYSTICAL SOURCES AS A CONDUIT

OF THE VISION TRADITION . . ..............

MYSTICAL MARRIAGE AS AN EXPRESSION OF UNITIVE
ENCOUNTER WITH GOD AS IT OCCURS IN SCRIPTURAL,
EARLY CHRISTIAN AND MYSTICAL SOURCES IN THE

Page
1

VISION TRADITION ..................... 115

IMPLICATIONS OF THE VISION TRADITION ON THE
UNDERSTANDING OF THE PEARL: TOWARD A TEXTUAL

READING AND APPRECIATION ...............

SELECT ED B IB LIOG RAPHY .................

iii

 

 

...o. g

.. v

 

' "AI
.

 

 

~,.

v‘.

.H

N

INTRODUCTION

Mead is preserved in a single manuscript - MS. Cotton Nero
A.X. - in the British Museum. The manuscript itself is not later than a-
bout 1400, and the poem is generally dated in the second half of the four-
teenth century. The poem has been discussed for its elegiac, allegori—
cal, symbolic, theological, scriptural, courtly and poetic qualities. Its
allusions to the Roman de la Rose, Boccaccio, Dante, Chaucer and the
Vulgate have been noted. New criticism has delved into the meanings
of specific words; historical criticism has viewed it as a reflection of
the fourteenth century and even as a preview of the Reformation; psycho-
logical criticism has analyzed the "I" of the narrator and described him
as everything from a bereaved father to a nun in her relationship to the
Lord; the school of biblical exegesis or allegoresis has ferreted out
"meanings" upon ”meanings" for the work; and critics generally have
used their Specialized tools to define more or less conclusively the com-
munication of the poem. In the end, the poem itself has resisted final
definition and has simply continued to be in its richness and fullness
always more than the sum of all its explications.
In adding to the existing collection yet another ”reading" of the
Poem, my purpose has not been to provide that definitive reading, nor
necessarily to displace the already existing critical opinions . Rather,
I have discovered that the unknown author of The Pearl has in his work

some highly suggestive passages which indicate that he was working

 

out of a tradition which existed side by side and intertwined with that
which fostered the " literary" dream vision convention. I use the term
vision tradition to designate this tradition.

In naming a second tradition, I am indicating that there is a
real difference between a dream and a vision. "'Dream‘ may be defined
as a series of thoughts, images, or other mental states, which are ex- 5"“
perienced during sleep."1 A vision, however, "in the older use of the f

word. . .is the conception of images presented to the more or less ab-

 

normal states of consciousness, and generally produced by supernatural J
agency."2 The essential difference in addition to the source of the
dream or vision is that a dream always occurs in sleep while a vision
may or may not. Part of the problem lies, of course, in terms . "The
term vision or dream literature is applied generally to narrations that use
dreams or visions as an artistic device. "3 And the term ”dream vision"
is used to indicate those occurring both in sleep and in waking hours .
The major difficulty with the usage of the term dream vision,
of course, is that it suggests that dreams and visions are the same
thing. The point of this work is that The Pearl is a vision, not a dream.
In order to keep the differentiation clear, I will use the terms ”dream, "
1LG. Iames, "Dream, '3 Dictionary of the Apostolic Church, ed. ,
Iames Hastings, I, 313.
2LG. James, ”Vision, '.' ibid., II, 643.

3G.M. Liegly, "Vision (Dream) Literature, " New Catholic Encyclo-
wi, 1967.

"dream tradition," and "dream literature" to designate works in the tra-

dition of the Roman de la Rose and the Book of the Duchess .

 

In investigating the possibility that a vision tradition existed,
it has never occurred to me to deny or obscure the very real influence of,
for example, the de Lorris section of the Roman de la Rose on The Pearl.
Neither has it appeared that the vision tradition existed in a vacuum and
did not enter the literary stream by way of the dream tradition, so-called ,
or any other number of ways . I have simply ascertained that an inten-
sive study of certain medieval traditions leads to a firm conviction that
they have entered both explicitly and implicitly into the final product of
the poet. Applying the results of this study to the poem has made for a
richer as well as clearer understanding of what the poem communicates .
Beyond this point, I am more than willing to allow the work to mean,
that is, to be in its totality.

The vision tradition described above is found most explicitly in

4 entry into and

the poem in the passages dealing with the Visionary's
passage out of the vision itself.

To speak, first of all, of the entry of the Visionary into the
vision, it is strikingly apparent that this is not the usual entry into a

literary dream. Reference to three conventional pieces of dream litera-

ture will make this difference graphic.

4Visionar_y is the word which will be used to designate the personage
in The Pearl who narrates the story and experiences the vision.

 

In The Romance of the Rose,5 The Pilgrimage of the Life of Man,6
and Chaucer's The Parliament of Fowls, 7 the respective narrators definite—

ly fall asleep. De Lorris records:

When I the age of twenty had attained--
The age when Love controls a young man's heart--
As I was wont, one night I went to bed
And soundly slept. But then came a dream
Which much delighted me . . . . (11. 14—18) E‘

Lydgate translates de Deguileville as saying:

Vp-on a nyht I lay and sclepe

Drempte, (yf ye lyst to lere,)

A wonder dreme, in tyme yffere .
(11. 214-216)

-I i-J' i

q?-'

 

And Chaucer's narrator tells us:

But fynally, my spirit at the laste,

For wery of my labour al the day,

Tok reste, that made me to slepe faste,
And in my slep I mette, as that I lay,
How Affrican . . . .

(11. 92-96)
on the other hand, the Visionary of M reports that after
meditating rather emotionally on the lost precious "pearl" which could
drive away his sorrow and lift up, exalt, his happiness and well being,

I slode vpon a slepyny~sla3te. . .

Fro spot my spyryt per sprang in space:

My body on balke per bod in sweuen .
(11. 61—62)

5Guillaume de Lorris and Jean de Meun, trans . Harry W. Robbins
(New York: E.P. Dutton and Co. . Inc. , 1952)-

6Englisht ($10.) by john Lydgate from the French of Guillaume de
Deguileville (London: EE‘I‘S, 1899-1904), Vols. LXXVII, LXXXIII, XCII.

7Ed., P.N. Robinson, 2nd ed. (Boston: Houghton Mifflin Co., 1957).

 

 

 

 

 

....w».
,
- r
.,.‘
'-p.'
.
... -.
H,“
_ _,
..._
.-_
.4.
_ u
.
‘7‘.
v
‘.
t
‘n
.
—
,
u.

De Lorris' , Lydgate's, and Chaucer's narrators, as noted above,
all go peacefully to rest; they fall into a natural nocturnal sleep and then
dream. The Visionary of The Pearl, however, "fell into a sudden onset

8

of sleep." I suggest that although the word slepyng is used, it has

another meaning because it is combined with slaate and because of the

 

information conveyed in line 61 . 7'1
First of all, £15133; has the usual meaning of "a violent or sud—
den blow."9 Thus it can be implied that the state into which the Vi—
sionary fell was not analogous with natural sleep. It was more a state J
.E

of bodily unconsciousness produced by the ”sudden blow" which might
be more likely to occur during the time of the intense mourning of the
Visionary. Or, following the OED which has the meaning of "Spell of
sleep" for 1. 59, it can be described as a state which is a "spell” not at
all analogous with natural sleep. The above gloss of Gollancz negates
the possibility of "spell" being interpreted here as natural sleep.
Moreover, lines 61—2 indicate that the Spirit of the Visionary
"sprang into space” while his body remained on the mound. The move-
ment of the spirit out of the body into space is neither a description of
ordinary sleep nor of a dream in sleep - especially when it is indicated
that the body remained behind in an unconscious state. The total de-

scription, however, is a very usual one, as will be illustrated below, of

8
Gordon, p. 49, note 59.

931: Israel Gollancz, ed. , Pearl: an English Poem of the XIVth century
(London, 1921; rpt. New York: Cooper Square Pub., 1966), p. 11, note 59.

a person who is experiencing a vision in the state of ecstasy .

I suggest, therefore, that line 59 should be read as the descrip-
tion of the Visionary moving from the conscious state of the normal hu-
man condition to the ecstatic state of one who is experiencing a vision.

The contrast between W1 Visionary's entrance into the
world of his vision and that of the narrators of the conventional dreams
quoted above is one premise upon which the reading of The Pearl and
the reality of a vision tradition different from the literary dream tradition

is based. It is possible to speak of the experience of the Visionary of

 

The Pearl as a vision more related to the experience of St. Paul on the
road to Damascus than to that of the reader of "Tullyus" in The Parlia-
ment of Powls .
The endings of the different literary works cited above also
give evidence that we may be dealing with another tradition in The Pearl.
In The Romance of the Rose, the narrator achieves his object, the
Rose, and simply awakens.
This, then, is how I won my vermeil Rose.
Then morning came, and from my dream at last Iwoke.
(11. 21779—21780)
The narrator in de Deguileville's work in like manner awakens
at the end of a dream experience motivated by the fear of the personified
Death swinging his scythe at him.
And gan so streytly me coharte,
. That the soule mot departe.
And, such a feer anoon me took,

Out of my slep that I a-wook.
(11. 24829—24832)

Chaucer's narrator simply comes to the end of his experience
with the birds and awakens .

And with the shoutyng, whan the song was do
That foules maden at here flygt awey,
Iwok, and othere bokes tok me to,

(11. 693-695)

However, the Visionary of The Pearl is so enraptured by the sight of his
Pearl within the heavenly Ierusalem that

Delyt me drof in y3e and ere,
My mane3 mynde to maddyng malte;
Quen I se3 my frely, Iwolde be bere,
By3onde be water ba3 ho were walte.
I b03t bat nobyng my3t me dere
To fech me bur and take me halte,
And to start in be strem schulde non me stere,
To swymme be remnaunt, ba3 I ber swalte.
Bot of bat munt I wat3 bitalt;
When I schulde start in be strem astraye,
Out of bat caste I wat3 bycalt:
Hit wat3 not at my Prynce3 paye.
1

Hit payed hym not bat I so flonc
Ouer meruelous mere3 , so mad arayde.
Of raas ba3 Iwere rasch and ronk,
3et rapely berrine I wat3 restayed .
For, ry3t as I sparred vnto be bonc,
bat brathbe out of my drem me brayde.
ben wakned I in bat erber wlonk;

(l1. 1153-1171)

Thus, The Pearl Visionary awakens from his ”drem" (i.e., vi—
sion - Gordon, p. 127) not because it is completed as Meun's and
Chaucer's are or because the dreamer is frightened as in de Deguileville
out of Lydgate. The Pearl Visionary awakens; he is not permitted to
cross the stream from the earthly Paradise into the heavenly Paradise be-

cause in so doing, he would cross from life through death, to life. And,

”.2"? v ‘

 

in" -:s..

more to the point, he would experience, i.e. , know God, face to face in
the Holy City. And, if this had happened, he could not have _l_i_y_e_d again
on earth. It is not the time, however, of the Visionary‘s death: he is
not yet ready for the face of God; nor is mystical rapture the point of
the vision which is the poem.

Now, in pursuing the "if," "why, " and "wherefore" of _T_h_e
Bea}; as a vision, internal evidence leads me to study it in relationship
to ecstasy, to vision per se, to mystical contemplation and to spiritual
marriage. In the appropriate places, more detail will be added to these
concepts merely named here. Finally, I thing it is possible to believe
that the Visionary spoke literally when he called his experience a leggy

ayysyoun (l. 1184) and acted, therefore, as a changed man (11. 1206-08).

.. UV

-:‘I"

“4...

 

 

 

‘.‘

 

I. ECSTASY AS IT OCCURS IN SCRIPTURAL AND MYSTICAL SOURCES
WITHIN THE VISION TRADITION
The starting point for the development of the thesis thatlhe
gea_rl_is a product or culminating point of a long vision tradition is with
the concept of ecstasy. The word ecstasy from the Greek word ekstasis
means literally "the state of standing out from." It signifies "being out-
side one's self, " a movement beyond and ”outside the limits of the in-
dividuality, " produced by deep emotion.1 The word describes a dis-
placement; in the sense indicated here it means a psychic displacement
and designates a state in which the consciousness is absorbed in emo-
tional or mystical experience.2 Literally, according to Strong,3 the
word derives from ex histemi meaning to stand out or from.4 As ekstasis
it acquires the shading of a displacement of the mind. Evidence that the
Visionary of The Pearl did not literally fall asleep but experienced an
ecstasy is found in lines 61-65 in the poem.
Fro Spot my spyryt ber sprang in space;
My body on balke ber bod in sweuen.
My goste is gone in Gode3 grace

In auenture ber meruayle3 meuen.
I ne wyste in bis worlde quere bat hit wace . . .

A. Closs, "Ecstasy," New Catholic Encyclopedia, 1967. Hereafter
referred to as NCE.

2 .
M.R.E. Masterman, "Ecstasy (In the Bible)," NCE, 1967.

3
lames Strong, The Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible.

4E .
ntires nos. 1611, 1839, 1537, and 2476.

I
10

It is possible to label this experience ecstatic because of its similarity
to St. Paul's as found in the Second Letter to the Corinthians .

Si gloriari oportet (non expedit quidem:)
veniam autem ad visiones et revelationes Domini.
Scio hominem in Christo ante annos quatrodecim
sive in corpore nescio, sive extra corpus nescio,
Deus scit, raptum hujusmodi u5que ad tertium coelum.
Et scio hujusmodi hominem sive in corpore, sive
extra corpus nescio, Deus scit: Quoniam raptus
est in Paradisum et audivit arcana verba, quae
non licit homini loqui.

‘ :1

k
.1.—

II Cor. 12:1—4 (Vulg.)

If I must glory (it is not expedient indeed) but ‘
I will come to the visions and revelations of the j
Lord. I know a man in Christ about fourteen years "__J
ago (whether in the body, I know not, or out of
the body, I know not; God knoweth), such an one
rapt even to the third heaven. And I know such a
man (whether in the body or out of the body, I
cannot tell. God knoweth): That he was caught up
into paradise, and heard secret words, which it is
not granted to man to utter.

II Cor. 1221—4 (Douay)

This particular account of an ecstatic experience interested
early scriptural commentators so that several glosses on the passage

are found in the Glossa Ordinaria.5 By looking at these, it will be

 

possible to enlarge upon our definition of ecstasy, as well as to show

that this kind of state is one most conducive to the experience of vi-

sions .

The first gloss is on the words sive in corpore, sive etc. It

reads as follows:

5Migne, Patrologia Latina, Vols. CXIII, CXIV. Hereafter the Glossa

W is referred to as G .O.; the Patrologia Latina is referred to as

x

11

Hoc ignoravit Apostolos , utrum quando raptus
est , in corpore fuerit anima , an omnino de corpore
exieret, adeo ut mortuum corpus jaceret, an secundum
modum alium quemdam viventis corporis ubi anima fuerit,
mens ejus ad videnda vel audienda ineffabilia illius
visionis accepta sit. Et quia hoc in certum erat,
ideo forsitan dixit, sive in corpore, sive extra-
Raptum. Contra naturam elevatum.

(3.0. in P.L. , Vol. CIV, col. 568.

This the apostle did not know, whether when he
was caught up, the soul was in his body or entirely
out of his body, so that the body lay as if dead; or
whether, according to another manner of understanding,
somewhat of a living body where the soul was, but the
mind was taken away to see and hear the ineffable
things of the vision. And because this was uncertain,
therefore perhaps he said, whether in the body or out
of the body. Caught up: raised up against nature.

Saint Augustine theorizes on this same subject in the following:

Nesciret . . . utrum quando in tertium coelum raptus
est, in corpore fuerit, quomodo est anima in corpore,
cum corpus vivere dicitur, sive vigilantis, sive dormientis,
sive in ecstasi a sensibus corporis alienate; an omnino de
corpore exierit, ut mortuum corpus jaceret, donec peracta
illa demonstratione membris mortuis anima redderetur, et
non quasi dormiens evigilaret, aut ecstasi alienatus denuo
rediret in sensus, sed mortuus omnino revivisceret . . . .
Sed quia ipsa a corpore alienata, utrum omnino mortuum
corpus reliquerit, an secundum modum quemdam viventis
corporis ibi anima fuerit, sed mens ejus ad videnda vel
audienda ineffabilia illius visionis arrepta sit, hac
incertum erat, ideo forsitan dixit, Sive in corpore sive
extra corpus, nescio, Deus scit.

(5.0. in P.L., XXXIV, 458 and de Gen. ad litt.,

Book XII, Sec. 5, par.14.

He did not know whether, when rapt to the third heav-
en, he was in the body, as the soul is in the body when
the body is said to live, be it of one awake or of one a-
sleep, or when in ecstasy the soul is alienated from the

‘ bodily senses; or whether his soul had altogether gone
forth from his body, so that the body lay dead, until,
when the revelation was over, his soul was restored to
the dead members; so that he did not awake as one asleep,

“n |

12

nor as one alienated in ecstasy, return to his senses;
but as one dead come to life again. But because,

’ when his soul was alienated from his body, it was
uncertain whether it left his body quite dead, or after
some manner of a living body, the soul was there,
but his mind carried away to see or hear the unspeak-
able things of that vision - for this reason, perhaps ,
he said, "Whether in the body or out of the body, I
know not; God knoweth."

(de Gen. ad 1m. XII, 5, 14).6

 

The early commentators called Paul's experience in Corinthians F

r -—-—__.__

an ecstasy: and the wording of lines 61-65 of The Pearl seems an echo

1'
s
!
it
I.
v‘

of the state described in these two glosses .

Scripture tells of a similar experience by St. Peter:

 

Postera autem die iter illis facientibus, et appro-
pinquantibus civitati, ascendit Petrus in superiora ut
oraret circa horam sextam. Et cum esuriret, voluit
gustare. Parantibus autem illis, cecidit super eum
mentis excessus: Et vidit coelum apertum, et descen—
dens vas quoddam, velut linteum magnum, quatuor
initiis submitti de coelo in terram. In guo erant omnia
quadrupedia, et serpentia terrae, et volatilia coeli.

Et facta est vox ad eum: Surge Petre, occide, et
manduca. Ait sutem Petrus: Absit Domine, quia nun—
guam manducavi omne commune, et immundum. Et
vox iterum secundo ad eum: Quod Deum purificavit,
tu commune ne dixeris . Hos autem factum est per

ter: et statim receptum est vas in coelum.
Acts 10:9-16 (Vulg.)

And on the next day, whilst they were going on
their journey, and drawing nigh to the city, Peter
went up to the higher parts of the house to pray, about
the sixth hour. And being hungry, he was desirous
to tastesomewhat. And as they were preparing, there
came upon him an ecstasy of mind. And he saw the
heaven opened and a certain vessel descending, as
it were a great linen sheet let down by the four cor-
ners from heaven to the earth. Wherein were all man-

6
Trans . , Dom Cuthbert Butler in Western Mysticism, 3rd ed. , p. 51.

13

ner of four-footed beasts, and creeping things of the
earth, and fowls of the air. And there came a voice
to him: Arise, Peter; kill and eat. But Peter said:
Far be it from me; for I never did eat anything that is
common and unclean. And the voice spoke to him
again the second time: That which God hath cleansed,
do not thou call common. And this was done thrice;
and presently the vessel was taken up into heaven.
Acts 1029-16 (Douay)

Verse 10 is critical to the whole case for the existence of vi-
sions as a tradition because the key word excessus translates the Greek
ekstasis. In Chapter 11 Peter speaks again of the experience narrated
in the previous chapter.

Ego eram in civitate Ioppe orans, et vidi in excessu
mentis visionem . . . .

Acts 11:5 (\lulg.)
Iwas in the city of Ioppe praying and I saw in an
ecstasy of mind a vision . . . .

Acts 11:5 (Douay)

In both versions Peter's experience is described as ekstasis.

Saint Chrysostom in a homily on the Acts asks the question,

"What means this expression (ekstasis) 'trance'? Rather there was pre-

9‘

 

sented to him a kind of spiritual view: the soul, so to say was caused
to be out of the body."7
The editor notes that the question was asked "because the word
also, and more commonly, means the being beside one's self, amazed
or stupefied by excess of grief. Chrysostom explains that it denotes the
7"Homily XXII (Acts 10:1—4) ," in Vol. XI of The Nicene and Post-

Nicene FatheLs, ed. by Philip Scaff, trans. by I. Walker, I. Sheppard,
and H. Browne, p. 143.

 

 

14

being rapt out of the bodily consciousness: it was not that Peter was
out of his mind but his soul out of his body . . . Peter, in his trance
(ekstasis) was strictly cognizant, so as to report what he has seen and
heard, and to be sensible of what the things shown were symbolical. "8

It seems to me that Chrysostom's explanation answers the
basic question regarding in what mode of existence visions may occur.
It explains, almost in modern psychological terms, the disposition of
the levels of the person undergoing such an experience.

Therefore, if ecstasies are a mode of consciousness in which
visions take place, this is the vital connection that they have with what
we are calling the vision tradition. And we will pursue the study of ec—
stasy further because, as noted above, it is the state in which the
Visionary in The Pearl experiences his visions.

There is another scriptural passage about Paul which, while it
does not contain the word ekstasis , obviously refers to the same sort of
eXperience. It can validly be used to expand our understanding of ec—
stasy as a state in which visions occur.

I am referring, of course, to the account of Paul's conversion
which is actually recorded three times in Acts. (Acts 9:3-19: 22:6-16:
and 26:12—18). The pertinent verses are as follows:

Et cum iter faceret, contigit ut appropin—
quaret Damasco: et subito circumfulsit eum

lux de coelo. Et cadens in terram audivit
vocem dicentem sibi: Saule, Saule, quid

8 .
Philip Schaff, ibid.

 

15

me persequeris ?
Acts 9:3—4 (Vulg.)

And as he went on his journey, it came to
pass that he drew nigh to Damascus; and
suddenly a light from heaven shined round
about him. And falling on the ground, he
heard a voice saying to him: Saul, Saul,
why persecutest thou me? .
Acts 9:3-4 (Douay)

Factum est autem, eunte me, et appropin—
quante Damasco Media die, subito de coelo
circumfulsit me lux copiosa: Et decidens
mihi: Saule, Saule, quid me persequeris?
Acts 22:6-7 (Vulg.)

And it came to pass as Iwas going, and
drawing nigh to Damascus at mid—day, that
suddenly from heaven there shone round
about me a great light: And falling on the
ground, I heard a voice saying to me: Saul,
Saul, why persecutest thou me?

‘Acts 22:6-7 (Douay)

In quibus dum irem Damascus cum poteste,
et permissu principum sacerdotum, Die media
in via, vidi, rex, de coelo supra splendorem
solis circumfulsisse me lumen, et eos, qui
mecum simul erant. Omnesque nos cum de—
cidissemus in terram, audivi vocem loquen—
tem mihi Hebraica lingua: Saule, Saule,
quid me persequeris? Durum est tibi contra
stimulum calcitrare.

Acts 26:12-14 (Vulg.)

Whereupon when Iwas going to Damascus with
authority and permission of the chief priest,
at mid—day, 0 king, I saw in the way a light
from heaven above the brightness of the sun,
shining round about me, and them that were
in company with me. And when we were all
fallen down on the ground, I heard a voice
speaking to me in the Hebrew tongue: Saul,
Saul, why persecutest thou me? It is hard for
thee to kick against the goad.

Acts 26:12-14 (Douay)

un-——- ml...
kg. .

 

16

Paul's falling to the earth prior to hearing a voice or seeing a
vision has somewhat the same tone about it as do the more explicit New
Testament accounts cited above. At the very least, it can be said that
what Paul was experiencing was so profound that it caused an ecstatic-
like state to be thrust upon his person. In any case, if this was true
ecstasy or not, this motif of falling prior to a vision experience certain-
ly enters into many works which could be labeled as under the influence
of the vision tradition. Lines 61—65 of The Pearl, as quoted above, re-
peat this sequence as does the opening of the Divine Comedy. Other
instances of this convention will be cited further on.

The continued use of ecstasy as a way into the place where vi-
sions occur appears in another set of sources which, while by no means
as reliable or important as canonical scripture, were immensely popular.
I speak of the extra-canonical or New Testament "apocrypha."

Take, for example, the entry of the narrator into his vision in

the "Shepherd of Hermes .”

After some time, while I was going to Cumae,
and glorifying the creation of God, for its
greatness and splendour and might, as Iwalked
along I became sleepy. And a spirit seized me
and took me away through a certain pathless
district through which a man could not walk,
but the ground was precipitous and broken up
by the streams of water. So I crossed the river,
and came to the level ground and knelt down
and began to pray to the Lord and to confess
my sins. Now while Iwas praying the Heaven
was opened, and I saw that woman, etc.

9Vision 1, chap. I, verses 3, 4 as cited in The Apostolic Fathers,

 

 

 

 

 

‘.'
\

-v

.1"

. ‘II‘

»I|‘~
‘

‘.ut-

l7

Admittedly this entry into the vision is not unambiguous; a case
could be made for the occurrence of the vision in sleep as in ecstasy.
However, the ”seizing" of the narrator by the "spirit" does contain the
element of ecstasy we noted above. Moreover, it definitely is in the
tradition which produced the opening of The Pearl.

Another early work, this time the first Acts of the Martyrs , con—

- 5-4‘ 33.1"
J
_“

tains an implication of ecstasy. It is in "The Passion of Perpetua and

Felicita." Of particular interest is the martyrdom of Perpetua itself.

 

The account tells of her being tossed and gored by a very fierce cow. J
She rises afterwards and "bound up her disheveled hair; for it was not L

becoming a martyr to suffer with disheveled hair, lest she should appear

to be mourning in her glory."10 At this point, she raises her companion

Felicita to her feet and they both stand by a certain catechumen, Rusti—

cus. The account continues as follows:

. . .and she, as if aroused from sleep, so deeply
had she been in the Spirit and in an ecstasy. . .
began to look round her, and to say to the amaze-
ment of all, 'I cannot tell when we are to be led
out to that cow.l And when she had heard what
had already happened, she did not believe it un-
til she had perceived certain signs of injury in
her body and in her dress , and had recognized
the catechumen. (Ibid.)

The "eye—witness" to Perpetua's ecstasy can give us no indica-

 

trans., Kersopp Lake, ed. by T.E. Page, E. Cupps and W.H.D. Rouse,
III 7.8.

10
Chapter VI, cited in The Ante-Nicene Fathers: Translations of the;
Mitings of the Fathers down to A.D. 325, trans. , R.E. Wallis, III,
705.

18

tion as to where Perpetua's spirit rested or where she was while her

body was so tormented . The report that she was in ecstasy, nonetheless,

is another instance of the continuing echoes which bridge the tradition
of ecstatic visions from the scriptural to the medieval ages .

So far, we have attempted to show the similarity between the
Visionary of The Pearl and two biblical figures , Peter and Paul. This
similarity consists of a seizing of their spirits which transports them to
a state in which visions occur. This state is defined as ecstatic. We
have also noted the. use ofecstasy as a mode in which visions occur in
some extra-canonical New Testament works .

During the centuries following Apostolic times, some of the
major writers in the mystical tradition theorized about the ecstasy in
which visions occur. The next chapter contains a definition of this tra-

dition and a discussion of its relationship to visions in general. If we

may extrapolate here, however, and simply state that these writers were

interested in ecstasy, we may be able to deepen our understanding of
the concept in the context we have established of biblical and extra-
canonical sources .

To discuss this concept of ecstasy, the following premise is
stated: Mysticism is a real way to know God: it does not need to in—
volve any abnormal manifestations : and it finds its reason for being in
the Holy One perceived.

The second member of the premise is, of course, our point of

departure. Mysticism does not need to involve any abnormal manifesta-

 

1‘)

{F‘EJ.SW a

‘4
D

19

tinns but it can, and has , involved them. One of these manifestations
is ecstasy.

At least one author11 identifies the essential phenomenon of
mysticism with what is called ecstasy (defined as a state in which all
communication with the external world is interrupted). Marechal, how-
ever, reminds us that several mystics claim to have realized the mysti-
cal communication without breaking contact with the external world . 12
William Iames, moreover, is quite emphatic in insisting that the phe-
nomena associated with mysticism - visions, verbal and graphic auto-
matism, levitation, stigmatisation, the healing of disease, etc. -

" . . . have no essential mystical significance, for they occur with no
consciousness of illumination whatever, when they occur, as they often
do, in persons of non-mystical mind."13

If we allow a rather eloquent mystic, john Tauler (1300-1361) ,
to speak of the essence of the state he experienced, we perhaps come
closer to the mystery than the psychologists are able.

The spirit is transported high above all the
faculties into a void of immense solitude
whereof no mortal can adequately speak. It
is the mysterious darkness wherein is con-

cealed the limitless Good. To such an ex-
tent are we admitted and absorbed into some—

llBoutrOUX in La Psychologie du mysticisme, p. 6, quoted in Ioseph
Marechal, Studies in the Psychology of the Mystics, trans. , Algar
Tharold (London: Burns, Dates, and Washboume, LTD. , 1927), p. 102.

l
2Mariachal, op. cit., p. 139, note 83.

13
Varieties of Religious Experience (London, 1904). p- 408. note 2.

20

thing that is one, simple, divine, illimitable,
that we seem no longer distinguishable from

it. I speak not of the reality, but of the appear-
ance, of the impression that is felt. In this
unity, the feeling of multiplicity disappears.
When afterwards , these persons come to them-
selves again, they find themselves possessed
of a distinct knowledge of things, more lumi-
nous and more perfect than that of others . . .
This obscurity is a light to which no created
intelligence can arrive by its own nature. It [—
is also a solitude, because this state is ‘1
naturally unattainable . 14

I
Marechal reiterates several of Tauler's points in the following: :5

It would seem, indeed, that the mystic, wholly ' '
absorbed in his sublime vision, loses the feeling ,J
of human personality and at the time makes no

conscious return to his acts. In fact there is

often revealed a relative unconsciousness which

is not the cessation of all intellectual activity,

but the supreme reduction — momentary, morever -

of the multiplicity of acts to unity, and conse—

quently of the perceived distinction of object

and subject.

Now it is necessary to discuss the physical ramifications of
ecstasy as a para—physical state concomitant with the essence of mysti-
cism of pure contemplation. Marechal considers physical ecstasy as "a
feeble adaptation of our somatic mechanisms to the excessive central

"16

supertension of high intellectual contemplation. And he finds it a

problem because of the absence in the subject of any trace of "discur-

l4Tauler, "First Sermon for the Second Sunday after Epiphany" quoted
in A. Poulain, The Graces of Interior Prayer, trans. from 6th ed. by
Leonora L. Yorke-Smith (London, 1912),, p.120.

15Marechal, p . 120.

15Ibid., p. 177.

 

\
II!
(II

 

'n"
l
,...n
A . _
.v.
1
, .‘Axv

any“

 

 

. I

 

 

21

siveness , spatial imagination or reflex consciousness . And the discon-
certing question arises: after images and concepts and the conscious
Ego have been abolished, what subsists of the intellectual life? Mul-

tiplicity will have disappeared, true , but to the advantage of what kind

of unity ? "1 7

He posits then three solutions to the problem of ecstasy: an}

1. The absence of multiplicity in ecstasy is
only apparent.

2 . The negativity of ecstasy is total uncon-
sciousness. ) J

 

3. Ecstasy is the synthesis of an empirical
negativity and a transcendent positivity.

Marechal then eliminates the first solution by admitting the
absence of all quantitative and conceptual multiplicity in the explicit
content of ecstasy. 19 Secondly, he qualifies the total unconsciousness
of the second solution into a "more rightly called subconsciousness, not
disintegrated but gathered together and directed. The only kind of un-
consciousness admissible in the explanation of ecstasy (we Speak of the
ecstasy of the great mystics) would be, on any hypothesis, a 'polarized
unconsciousness,‘ the religious value whereof might be very consider-

able . " 20

17'Maréchal, p. 185.

18mm, pp. 186-190.

191mm, p. 189.

20
Ibid. , p. 190.

22

The first element of the third solution, the ”empirical nega-O

tivity," occurs as a result of "the leaving aside of imagery and spa-

tiality, the absence of enumerable multiplicity.‘ The negativity of ec-

stasy is , in a word, "the cessation of conceptual thought. "21

The "transcendent positivity," on the other hand, is the affirma-
tion that "this cessation of conceptual thought is not total unconscious—

ness, but rather an enlargement, an intensification, or even a higher

form of intellectual activity . "22

"Now these two affirmations are contradictory . . . [yet] . . .
the human intelligence is able, in certain conditions, to attain an in-
tuition which is proper to itself, or, in other words, that the intelligence,
instead of constructing its object analogically and approximately from

materials borrowed from the sensibility, can sometimes attain that ob—

ject by an immediate assimilation . . . [HOW] . - - intuition means the

immediate assimilation of an object and a knowing subject, according to

the possibilities of their respective natures . Now, in the special case

of the intelligence, this object can only be defined as an ontological ab-

solute: it is Being. "23

In this very technical light, ecstasy ceases to be a less than

totally human act, a ”feeble adaptation of our somatic mechanisms to

“Marechal, p. 194.
22mm.

23 I
Marechal , pp . 194-195 .

 

.F-T- ‘.K’ .

‘_. ,

23

the excessive central supertension of high contemplation" and becomes ,
instead, the state in which the most totally human approach, nay, ex-
perience of absolute truth occurs.

This modern technical explanation of ecstasy leads us directly
into the most important explanation of the phenomenon, that made by St.
Augustine. We have already quoted from Augustine in the scriptural con—
sideration of this subject; now a closer examination of his theory is in
order.

The main source for this information is in the twelfth book of gig

 

Genesi ad litteram; "it is a psychological discussion arising out of St.
Paul's description of his great mystical experience. "
Saint Augustine defines ecstasy as follows:

Quando autem penitus avertitur atque abripitur
animi intentio a sensibus corporis, tunc magis
ecstasis dici solet. Tunc omnio quaecumque
sint praesentia corpora, etiam patentibus oculis
non videntur, nec ullae voces prorsus audiun-
tur . . .(de Gen. ad litt. XII, 12,25)
Quapropter cum rapitur anima in ea visa quae
spiritu cemuntur similia corporalibus, ita

ut omniio a sensibus corporis avertatur am-
plius quam in somno solet, sed minus quam

in morte . . . (Ibid., XII, 26, 53)25

When the attention of the mind is wholly turned

away and withdrawn (penitus avertitur atque
1111111133) from the bodily senses, it is called

an ecstasy. Then whatever bodies may be

present are not seen with the open eyes , nor

any voices heard at all (de Gen. ad litt.XII, 12, 25).

2‘lBu’tler, p . 50 .

2
5P.L., XXXIV, 463, 476.

24

It is a state midway between sleep and death:
The soul is rapt (rapitur) in such wise as to

be withdrawn (avertatur) from the bodily senses
more than in sleep, but less than in death

(de Gen. ad litt. XXVI, 53).

The causes of ecstasy are stated as follows:

Ecstasis namque est mentis excessus: quod
aliquando pavore contingit; nonunquam vero
per aliquam revelationem alienatione mentis
a sensibus corporis, ut spiritu quod demon-
strandum est demonstretur. (Enar. in Psalm lxvii, 36)27
Ecstasy is a departure (excessus) of the
mind, which sometimes happens by fright,

but sometimes by some revelation, through

an alienation of the mind from the senses

of the body in order that to the s§>irit may

be shown what is to be shown.2

In a fully religious ecstasy the subject " . . . abreptus a sen-

 

sibus corporis et subreptus in Deum . . . et redditus mortalibus mem—
bri. . . (Sermon lii, l6).29 The subject . . is withdrawn from

the bodily senses and is carried away unto God and afterwards restored

to his mortal members . "30

In addition to the comment on 11 Cor. 12:2-4 which is quoted

earlier in this chapter, Augustine comments on the same text in the Liber

29—12% (Ep. cxlvii) which throws light on Augustine's psychological

2

6Quoted in Butler, p. 50.
272$. XXXVI, 834.
28 .

Quoted in Butler, pp. 50—51.
29%. xxxvm, 360.

30Quoted in Butler, p. 51.

 

25

ideas of ecstasy .

31

“Ote 1. par. 3.

Deinde potest movere, quo modo iam ipsa Dei
substantia videri potuerit a quibusdam in hac
vita positis, propter illud quod dictum est ad
Moysen: Nemo potest faciem meam videre et
vivere, nisi quia potest humana mens divinitus
rapti ex hac vita ad angelicam vitam, antequam
per istam communem mortem carne solvatur.

Sic enim raptus est, qui audivit illic ineffabilia
verba quae non licet homini loqui, ubi usque ad
ea facta est ab huius vitae sensibus quaedam
intentionis aversio, ut sive in corpore sive
extra corpus fuerit, id est utrum, sicut solet

in vehementiore exstasi, mens ab hac vita in
illam vitam fuerit alienata manente corporis vin—
culo, an omnio resolutio facta fuerit, qualis in
plena morte contingit, nescire se diceret. Ita
fit ut et illud verum sit quod dicum est: Nemo
potest faciem meam videre et vivere, quia necesse
est abstrahi ab hac vita mentem quando in illius
ineffabilitatem visionis adsumitur, et non sit
incredibile quibusdam sanctis nondum ita defunctis,
ut sepelienda cadavera remanerant, etiam istam

excellentiam revelationis fuisse concessam.
(Par. 31)

The question may be raised, How the Very Sub-
stance of God could have been seen by some
while still in this life,--unless it be that the
human mind may be divinely rapt from this life
to the angelic life, before it be separated from
the flesh by ordinary death. So was he rapt,
who heard unspeakable words that man may not
utter, where to such a degree occurred a with—
drawal of the attention from the senses of this
life, that he declared he knew not whether he
was in the body or out of the body; that is,
whether as is wont to happen in a more vehe-
ment ecstasy, his mind was alienated from this
life to that, the bond with the body remaining;
or whether there was a complete severance, as
happens in real death. Thus it comes about

Ed. Goldbacher, 'Corpus Viennense' quoted in Butler, p. 58, foot-

 

26

that that is true which was said: No one can
see My face and live, because the mind must
be withdrawn from this life when it is carried
away to the ineffableness of that vision; and
also, that it is incredible that even this trans-
cendent revelation has been granted to certain
holy men not yet dead in the full sense that
they continued to be corpses for burial.

In these two passages (from de Gen. ad litt. , X11, 5 , l4 and

Liber de Vivendo Deg, Ep. cxlvii) , Augustine draws a distinction between

 

the soul (anima) which during an ecstasy remains in the body, and the
mind (mens) which is withdrawn from the bodily senses. This, of course,
is the same distinction as noted in the gloss on pp. 10—11. In most of
the places that deal with the phenomena of ecstasy, it is the mind that

is said to be alienated from the body; but in some it is the soul or even

the person. The passages just cited are, according to Butler, the ones

in which Augustine " . . . strives with most precision to attain to scien—

tific accuracy . . . and the ones most in harmony with the data of psy—

Ch0109y. According to it Augustine's idea of what takes place in ecstasy

iS an alienation of the mind from the bodily senses , but not of the soul

from the body .1133

The more important side of ecstasy, that is, content or what

takes place in this state, will be handled below Within the section on

: ' ' ' in
Visions as such. Another prime contributor to the mystical tradition

3213313 31. quoted in Butler, pp. 57-58.

33Butler. p . 5 1 .

 

27

the late Middle Ages is Pseudo-Dionysius the Areopagite. The following
prayer is a summary of his attitude towards the mystical experience:

. . . tu vero, chare Timothee, in mysticis contem—
plationibus, intenta exercitatione, et sensus
relinque, et intellectuales operationes, et sen-
sibilia, et intellibibilia omnia, et ea quae sunt
et quae non sunt universa, ut ad unionem ejus ,
qui supra essentiam et scientiam est, quantum
fas est, indemonstabiliter assurgas; siquidem per
liberam et absolutam, et puram tui ipsius a rebus
omnibus avocationem, ad supematuralem illum
caliginis divinae radium detractis omnibus et a
cunctis expeditus, eveheris.
34

(De myst. theol., c. 1)
Do thou, O dear Timothy, by thy persistent com-
merce with the mystic visions, leave behind both
sensible perceptions and intellectual efforts, and
all objects of sense and intelligence, and all
things both not-being and being, and be raised
aloft unknowingly to the union, as far as is at-
tainable, with Him who is above every essence
and knowledge. For by the resistless and abso-
lute ecstasy in all purity, from thyself and all,
thou wilt be carried on high, to the superessen-
tial ray of the divine darkness , when thou hast
cast away all and become free from all.35

Although the "negative way" of Dionysius's thought does not

directly enter into the material compressed into The Pearl, it is the basis

for a large body of mystical writing. And, as is evident in the prayer

QUOtGd. there is acceptance of ecstasy as a state in which the mystical

eXperience can occur. Thus the via negationis is yet another carrier of

the tradition from Paul to The Pearl.

34P.G. III, 998—999.

 

35% myst. theol., c. l, trans. by C. Poulain, 134, quoted in

Maréchal. p. 119.

 

 

,5
I
.-
_\
.0
gun
.

~
‘4‘. ~-

 

 

 

“N

«I'-

"«‘-

a“.
. -
,.. '
“A.
-

 

28

St. Gregory the Great was the recognized master of mysticism
from his day (540-604) through the five centuries of the early Middle
Ages. Although he does not theorize about ecstasy to the extent that
Augustine does, "the ideas thereon of any practical mystic, as Gregory
pre-eminently was , must needs repay study and prove a valuable con—
tribution to the psychology of religious experience. "36

St. Gregory uses the word 'rapt' (rapere, rapi) in speaking of a

soul in contemplation or a mystical state; he also speaks "of the soul

fill" | -_ 6.

being borne out of itself, or above itself, or above the world, or being

 

11’

carried beyond the confines of the flesh."37 Surely such terminology im—
plies somewhat the same concept of ecstasy which we have been tracing.
A presentation of some other quotations from Gregory is perhaps the best
evidence.

Per contemplationem super nosmetipsos tollimur.

Anima fit super semetipsam.

Carnis claustra transgrediens super semetipsam
ire conatur.

Extra carnis angustias sublevati.

Extra mundum, extra carnem fieri.

Mens superior existat mundo . . . extra mundum

fuit .

Mens stare diu super semetipsam non potest.

361311111912 p. 83.

3
7Ibid .

29

Contemplativae . . . super semetipsam
animam rapit.
(P.L. LXXVI, 956)

Super se interius rapti, in alto animum figunt.
(P.L. LXX'V, 706)

By contemplation we are lifted up above ourselves .
(HomLin Ezech. 1. iii. 1)

Our mind becomes above itself.

(Dial, ii. 35)

The mind, passing beyond the barriers of flesh,
endeavors to go above itself.
(Mor. x. 31)

 

We are lifted up outside the confines of the flesh.
(Ibid. , x. 13)

I strove daily to become outside the world, out-
side the flesh. -

(Ep. 1. 5)

The mind becomes above the world-— outside the
world.
(Dial, ll. 35)

The mind cannot stand for long above itself (in
contemplation) .

(Mor. v. 57)

Contemplation ravishes (rapit) the soul above
itself.
(Hom. in Ezech. 11. ii. 13)

Caught up inwardly above themselves , they
fix their mind on high .

(Mgr. vii. 53)
St. Gregory also has a relevant gloss on the words from St.
Peter's ecstasy, " He returned to himself.” He discusses them in con-

nection with the same words used of the Prodigal Son.

30

:)uobis modis, Petre, extra nos ducimur: quia

aut per cogitationis lapsum sub nosmetipsos

recidimus , aut per contemplationis gratiam

super nosmetipsos levamur. Ille itaque qui

porcos pavit, vagatione mentis et immunditia

sub semetipsum cedidit; iste vero quem angelus

solvit, ejusque mentiem in exstaim rapuit,

extra se quidem, sed super semetipsum fuit.

Uterque ergo ad se rediit, quando et ille ab

errore operis se collegit ad cor, et iste

a contemplationis culmine ad hoc rediit, » .
quod in intellectu communi et prius fuit . . . q
hunc contemplationis ardor in altum rapuit,
se procul dubio se reliquit.

 

(Dial. ll. 3)38 1
In two ways we are led out of ourselves: either " 1‘:
by sinful thoughts we fall below ourselves, or !_J

by the grace of contemplation we are raised
above ourselves . The Prodigal fell below him—
self; but Peter, whose mind was rapt in ecstasy,
was out of himself indeed, but above himself.
Each "returned to himself" — the former when,
conscience smitten, he forsook his evil ways;
the latter when from the height of contemplation
he returned to the normal state of intellect as
before. When the ardour of contemplation bears
one aloft, he leaves himself beneath himself.

(Dial. ll. 3)39

In Dial. ll. 35, St. Gregory describes St. Benedict's great mys—
tical experiences. This reference is important here because St. Gregory

formulates a theory in explanation of such experiences. The vision is

described as follows:

Cumque vir Dei Benedictus , quiescentibus adhuc
fratribus instans vigiliis , nocturnae orationis

3
8P.L. , LXVI, 158.

39
Quotations from Gregory are found in Butler, pp. 83—84. Butler,

however, denies that Gregory ever wrote meaningfully about ecstasy or
experienced it. (See esp. , p. 85)

31

empora praevenisset, ad fenestram stans, et
omnipotentem Deum deprecans , subito intempesta
noctis hora respiciens, vidit fusam lucem
desuper cunctas noctis tenebras effugasse, tan—
toque splendore clarescere, ut diem vinceret

lux illa quae inter tenebras radiasset. Mira
autem res valde in hoc speculatione secutus

est: quia, sicut post ipse narravit, omnis eliam
mundus velut sub uno solis radio collectus , ante
oculos ejus adductus est. Qui venerabilis Pater,
dum intentam oculorum aciem in hoc splendore
coruscae lucis infigeret, vidit Germani Capuani
episcopi animam in sphaera ignea ab angelis in
coelum ferri. 40
(Dial, ll. 35)

Butler's somewhat free translation is as follows:

 

While Benedict was standing at the window of
the tower, beseeching Almighty God, suddenly,
at dead of night, looking out he saw that a light
shed from above had dissipated all the darkness
of the night, and was shining with such splen-
dour that the light that had shone forth amid the
darkness surpassed the day. And a very wonder—
ful thing followed in that spectacle: for, as
afterwards he himself narrated, the whole world,
gathered as it were under one ray of the sun,
was brought before his eyes. And while he
fixed the steady gaze of his eyes in this splen—
dour of the shining light, he saw the soul of
Germanus , bishop of Capua, carried to heaven
by the angels in a fiery ball.

And the theory Gregory develops is as follows:

Animae videnti Creatorem angusta est omnis
creatura. Quamlibet etenim parum de luce
Creatoris aspexerit, breve ei fit omne quod
creatum est; quia ipsa luce visionis intimae
mentis laxatur sinus , tantumque expanditur

in Deo ut superior existat mundo. Fit vero ipsa
videntis anima etiam super semetipsam; cumque
in Dei lumine rapitur super se, in interioribus

40
LL... LXVI. 198.

32

ampliatur; et dum sub se conspicit exaltata,
comprehendit quam breve sit quod compre-

hendere humiliata non poterat. Vir ergo Dei,

qui intuens globum igneum, angelos quoque

ad caelum redeuntes videbat, haec procul—

dubio cemere nonnisi in Dei lumine poterat.

Quid itaque mirum si mundum ante se collectum
vidit, qui sublevatus in mentis lumine extra
mundum fuit? Quod autem collectus mundus ante
eius oculos dicitur, non caelum et terra con-
tracta est, sed videntis animus est dililatatus ,

qui in Dec raptus videre sine difficultate potuit
omne quod infra Deum est. In illa ergo luce

quae exterioribus oculis fulsit, lux in interiore
mente fuit, quae videntis animum quia ad superiora
rapuit, ei quam angusta essent omnia inferiora mon—
stravit.

 

 

(Dial. ii. 35; ed. Mittermuller, 1880)41

To the soul that sees the Creator every created
thing is narrow. For however little it be of the
light of the Creator that it beholds, all that is
created becomes to it small: because by the
very light of the inmost vision the bosom of the
mind is enlarged, and it is so expanded in God
that it is above the world. But the seer's soul
itself becomes also above itself, and when in
the light of God it is rapt above itself, it is
broadened out interiorly; and while raised aloft
it looks downwards , it understands how small
is that which in its lowly estate it could not
understand. Therefore the man of God, who,
looking on the fiery globe, saw also angels re-
turning to heaven, assuredly could see these
things only in God's light. And so, what won-
der is it if he saw the world gathered together
before him, who, being raised up in the light of
his mind, was out of the world? And that the
world is said to have been gathered before his
eyes, it is not that the heaven and earth were
contracted, but the seer's mind was enlarged,
who, being rapt in God, could see without dif—
ficulty all that is beneath God. In that light,
therefore, which shone on his outward eyes ,

41
Quoted in Butler, p. 87, footnote 1.

33

there was a light in his inward mind, which,
by ravishing the seer‘s mind to things above,
showed him how small were all things below.

Finally, Butler concludes from this last quotation that Gregory
never represents St. Benedict as being carried away by ecstasy because
he called out three times at the height of his vision. I do think that al-
though Gregory may not have described ecstasy as directly or explicitly
as, say, Augustine, he certainly continued the vocabulary and the con-
cept that visions occur in some ecstatic-like state into the early Middle
Ages. Terms such as ecstasy in their purity must be allowed to mean
more ambiguously, less scientifically in the milieu which was the Mid-
dle Ages. A twentieth century scientific definition, such as the one ap-
plied by Butler, distorts this ambiguity. This ambiguity itself does not
in any way destroy the basic premise of this study. It does, however,

show that the tradition gained and lost meanings .

In the eleventh and twelfth centuries , there was a marked re-

vival of mystical religion. St. Hildegarde (1098-1179) , a German abbess

and prophetess, Richard of St. Victor (died c. 1173), and St. Bernard
(1091-1153) are the chief exponents.

St. Hildegarde's account of her visions will be considered more
in detail below. Richard of St. Victor left us three stages of mystical
apprehension which he explained as follows. First, there is a dilation of

the mind when it realizes its own capacity for a wider and more wonderful

42Quoted in Butler, pp. 86-87.

 

:
h ‘

34

span of existence. Second, there follows an uplifting of the mind into
things above itself which is the essence of prayer. Finally comes a
snatching away or "alienation" of the mind to another sphere of reality,
43
which constitutes ecstasy.
St. Bernard is the dominant figure in twelfth century religious

life. In his treatment of the state of ecstasy, he uses the familiar word

excessus, or the verb mente excedire. This is taken from St. Paul:

 

.. . .44
"Sive mente excedimusg Deo; sive sobrii sumus, vobis. '

Butler maintains that when this Scripture uses mente excedire,
it does not mean " . . . anything of the nature of full religious ecstasy."

At this juncture, it seems essential to reiterate that, although I do not

(11 Cor. 5:13)

45

seriously question Butler's more expert understanding of the full implica-

tions of the subject, my point is much simpler. A tradition in which ec-
stasy, of one kind or degree or another, is put forth as the state or mode
in which visions occur, can be traced through the mystical tradition into
the fourteenth century. Therefore , the following excerpts from Bernard
are given as evidence for this point only — reserving judgment on the
Quality of ecstasy herein recorded.

Proinde et ego non absurde sponsae exstasim
vocaverim mortem, quae tamen non vita, sed vitae

43
Developed in his three works Benjamin Minor, or The Preparation of

the Soul; Benjamin Major, or Contemplation; and the Four Degrees of
Blrning Love. Evelyn Underhill, Mystics of the Church, p. 80.

 

 

4
4Butler, p. 115 .

4
5Ibid .

 

 

46
.E.-_L_-_. CLXXXIII, 1031-1032.

35

eripiat laqueis . . . Inter medios namque laqueos
in hoc vita inceditur, qui utique toties non timentur,
quoties sancta aliqua et vehementi cogitatione anima
a semetipsa abripitur; si tamen eousque mente sece—
dat et avolet, ut et hunc communem transcendat usum
et consuetudinem cogitandi . . . Quid enim formidetur
luxuria, ubi nec vita sentitur? Excedente quippe
anima, etsi non vita, certa vitae sensu, necesse est
etiam ut nec vitae tentatio sentiatur . . . Bona mora
quae vitam non auferi/t sed transferi/t in melius ,
bona, qua non corpus cadit, sed anima sublevatur.
Verum haec hominum est. Sed moriatur anima mea
morte etiam, si dici potest, angelorum, ut praesen-
tium memoria excedens, rerum se inferiorum corpor-
carumque non modo cupiditatibus, sed et similitudi-
nibus exu/iiat, sitque ei pura cum illis conversatio,
cum quibus est puritatis similitudo. Talis, ut opinor
excessus aut tantum, aut maxime contemplatio dicitur.
Rerum etenim cupididtatibus Vivendo non teneri, humanae
virtutis est, corporum vero similitudinibus speculando
non involvi, angeli‘cae puritatis est. Utrumque tamen
divini muneris est, utrumque excedere, utrumque te
ipsum transcendere est, sed longe unum, alterum
non longe . . . sed nondum elongasti, nisi et irruentia
undique phantasmata corporearum similitudinum trans-
volare mentis puritate praevaleas . Hucusque noli tibi
promittere requiem. Erras si citra inveniere te exis-
timas locum quietis, secretum solitudinis, luminis
serenum, habitaculum pacis . Sed da mihi qui illuc
pervenerit, et incunctantur fateor quiescentem . . .
atque hic vere in solitudine locus et in lumine habita-
tio . . . Puta ergo in solitudinem hare secessisse
sponsam, ibique prae amoenitate loci inter amplexus
sponsi suaviter obdormisse, id est in spiritu exces-
sisse . . . Profecto ne inquietae adolescentulae
audeant levi ex causa evocare dilectam a tam reveren—
do collegio, cui absque dubio toties admiscetur,
quoties contemplando excedit.

(gent. lii, 4--6)46

I may then, without any absurdity, call the ecstasy
ekstasis) of the Bride a death, but one which delivers
her not from life, but from the snares of life. For in
this life we proceed in the midst of snares; which,

 

36

however, are not feared as often as the soul, by
some holy and vehement thought, is carried away
out of itself (a semetipsa abripitur), provided that

it so far departs in mind and flies away (mente
secedat et avolet), that it transcends its usual way
of thought. For how should impurity be feared,
where there is no consciousness of life? For when
the soul is transported (excedente anima), though
not from life, yet from consciousness of life, the
temptations of life cannot be felt. It is a good death j
which does not take away life, but changes it into 5:1
something better, by which the body does not fall, ' P
but the soul is elevated.

 

This is a death which is the lot of men. But may
the soul die the death also, if I may so speak, of ..
the angels: that, departing from the memory of things J
present, it may divest itself not only of the desires -
but of the images of things below and corporeal, and
may have pure commerce with those with whom is the
image of purity. Such transport (excessus) alone, or
in the highest degree, is named contemplation. For
while alive not to be held by the desires of things is
the part of human virtue; but in the processes of
thought (speculando) , not to be enveloped by the
images of bodies is the part of angelic purity. But
both are by divine gift, both are 'to be transported,’
both are to transcend yourself; but one a long way,

the other not long. You have not yet gone a long way
unless you are able by purity of mind to fly over

, (transvolare) the phantasmata of corporeal images that
rush in from all sides . Unless you have attained to
this , do not promise yourself rest. You are mistaken
if you think that short of this you find a place of
quiet, secret solitude, serene light, a dwelling of
peace. But show me him who has arrived thither, and
Iwill straightway confess that he is enjoying rest
(quiescentem). This place is truly in solitude, this
dwelling is in the light. Suppose, therefore, that

the Bride has withdrawn into this solitude, and there
through the delightfulness of the place has sweetly
gone to sleep in the embrace of the Bridegroom, that
is to say, has been transported in spirit (as in an
ecstasy). . . . As often as the Bride is transported
(excedit) in contemplation, so often is she associated

 

 

 

 

t“ z“?

"I II\'-

‘- :D‘AI‘I

'4»

37

with the august company of the blessed s irits.

(cant. lii, 4—6) 7

The words ekstasis, excessus, mente excedere, abripere,

 

 

avolare, transvolare, and transcendere carry the weight of the argument

48

 

 

well enough for our purpose .

Bernard's use of the word m and {apiwill also be illustrated
to show yet another use of the notion of seizing in a rather violent way
which, as we have noticed before, is part of the tradition.

. . . si quando per excessum rapi in illam contingat,

digitus Dei est iste, dignanter levans hominem non

hominis temeritas insolenter Dei alta pervadens.
(Cant, lxii. 4)49

. . ad tertium puritas rapit, qua ad invisibilia
sublevamur. 50
(de Grad. Hum. 19)

(Hoc posteriori genere) contemplationis rapi
desiderat anima perfecta in cas issimos amplexus
Sponsi sui . . .

(Serm. de dev. lxxxvii. 2)51

In hoc arcanum et in hoc sanctuarium Dei si quem
forte vestrum aliqua hora sic rapi et sic abscondi
contigerit, ut minime avocet aut perturbat vel sen-
sus agens , vel cura pungens, vel culpa mordens,
vel ea certe, quae difficilius amoventur, irruentia
imaginum corporearum phantasmata: poterit quidem

47
Quoted in Butler, pp. 115-116.

Butler points these words out but uses them to maintain that the
ecstasy is mental and not physical. p- 116-

49
P.L. , CLXXXIII, 1078.

50

2.4... CLXXXII, 952.
51

LL... CLXXXIII, 704.

 

 

 

sages

52

53

54

38

hic, cum ad nos redierit, gloriari et dic re:
Introduxit me rex in cubiculum suum.
(Cant. xxiii. 16)52

Butler's idiomatic translation clarifies the meaning of these pas-

in English:

If ever it befall one to be rapt by transport

to the contemplation of God's majesty, that

is the Finger of God, not the temerity of man.
(Qa_n_t_. lxii. 4)

Purity carries us off (rapit) to contemplation,
whereby we are lifted up to things invisible.
(de Grad. Hum. 19)

 

The perfect soul desires to be rapt by contempla—
tion to the chaste embraces of her Spouse.
(Serm. de dev. lxxxvii.2)

If it have ever befallen one of you at any time to
be rapt and so hidden in the secret sanctuary of
God, as not to be called away or disturbed by the
needs of the senses, or by the sting of some care,
or the pang of some sin, or, what is with greater
difficulty kept off, the inrushing phantasmata of
bodily images; such an one, when he comes back
to us, will be able to glory and to say: "The
King hath brought me into his bedchambe
(Capt. xxiii. 16)

r.“
53
(in contemplatione) interdum exceditur et seceditur
etiam a corporeis sensibus, ut sese non sentiat
quae Verbum sentit. Hoc fit cum mens ineffabili
Verbi illecta dulcedine, quodam modo se sibi furatur,
imo rapitur atque elabitur a seipsa , ut Verbo furatur.
(Cant. lxxv. 13)54

(In contemplation) In the latter kind of travail

P.L., CLXXXIII, 893.
Quoted in Butler, pp. 116-117.

Quoted in Butler, p. 117.

t A. A

 

ti

.r— A
Elfi— .‘

39

it sometimes happens that the soul is so transported
out of itself and detached from the senses, that,
though conscious of the Word, it has not conscious-
ness of itself. This is the case when the mind is
drawn on by the ineffable sweetness of the Word,
and, as it were, is stolen from itself; or, rather,
it is rapt and abides out of itself to enjoy the Word.
(Cant. lxxxv. 13)55

The most pertinent question to be asked here is what the tradition
has to do with the poem, The Pearl. We have already stated in several

places that lines 61-65 , especially, of the poem are rather surely proof

 

that the Visionary of the poem was seized into ecstasy and did not mere-

 

1
1y fall asleep. The fact that he experiences visions within this state in L)
the main portion of The Pearl seems to be very much in keeping with what
happened to Paul and Peter as recorded in the scriptures as well as being
the experience of several "semi—fictional" personages in the extra-canoni-
cal texts considered. Moreover, major religious figures of the early and
high Middle Ages, namely Augustine, Gregory, and Bernard, have written
about the ecstatic state explicitly and almost in modern psychological
terms in the case of Augustine, and implicitly and less directly in the
cases of Gregory and Bernard. All three, however, have continued the
tradition down into the age where the Pearlpoet would have most probab-
ly grappled directly or indirectly with the idea. That he did is evidenced
in lines 61-65 most especially and probably also in line 1088:
So watz I rauyste wyth glymne pure.

This line is particularly significant because of the presence of

55
Quoted in Butler, p. 113.

 

 

.
.-
.-rl‘ "‘
' v1
“.1.
. ’R "
_\
_ .vuIH
-
‘.' t‘!
r. art I
n

, --.-~

I
.4 in. d
u, ..

“n M

m. a.
——

"“J ‘ !

 

.. _‘
‘ \
v u
.
., '
I
. 'I
I
«‘.‘.
'.,,
H.
l-
.. '
a
r.

 

40

the word rauyste. The OED identifies this word as one form which the
modern word ravish took during the fourteenth to sixteenth centuries .

The source of the word is identified as from the French raviss , lengthened

 

stem of Lay/1;, to seize, take: pop. Latin 3.1.9143, classical Latin rapere.
Now this same source records under listing 2b that the word had the
meaning, "to carry away (esp. to heaven) in a mystical sense; to trans-
port g1__sp_irit without bodily removal. " The word in the context of The
Rea_rl_is quoted in the OED under meaning 2c, "to transport with the
strength of some feeling, to carry away with rapture: to fill with ecstasy
or delight; to entrance."

In this chapter, we have surveyed briefly the understanding of
the state of ecstasy as it was probably known to the author of The Pearl.
The point to be stressed is that the experience of the narrator of the
poem is not one of falling asleep but of ecstasy. This gives us one bit

of evidence that The Pearl is not a dream like the Roman de la Rose or

The k f th chess but a real vision.

 

 

II. VISIONS IN SCRIPTURAL AND APOCRYPHAL SOURCES
AS THEY CONSTITUTE THE VISION TRADITION

Edgar Hennecke in speaking of apocalypses makes a useful dif-
ferentiation. He sees apocalyptic visions as taking place either in
dreams or in ecstatic visions. He adds that eventually the apocalyptic
vision takes place only through visionary rapture (which is equated with
ecstatic vision). Thus he finds in the Apocalypse or Book of Revelations
only ecstatic visions and no "dream visions ."1 The principal point of
this paper is far from a discussion of visions in apocalypses . However,
the recognition of at least two kinds of visions operating in biblical

times strengthens the case for the existence of a vision tradition separate
to some degree from the dream tradition in literature.

Moreover, the term ecstatic vision may be useful for carrying

the connotation of a vision which occurs in a state of ecstasy. There

is evidence of both ecstatic visions and those not occurring in a state of
ecstasy in the tradition we are tracing. The citation of relevant scrip— ’
tural glosses as well as some examples from extra—canonical sources
will lay the foundation for some of the implications which visions came
to carry with them into the mystical and literary traditions .

But before pursuing the main line of thought, it is necessary to
take a step backward and explain why this study starts with Christian
times and will not reach back beyond them in any profound manner. This

1New Testament Apocgypha, Vol. 1: Gospels and Related Writings,
ed., R. McL. Wilson (philadelphia: The Westminster Press), p. 583.

41

:3
L.

 

1.._._

 

‘ ...‘f
u

...w

4
'7’: :
u

I... ‘4
.Iu' "'
. .-

,., u.

,. u.‘
I

a

.. an I

,. v-

'-n up
-

nut-V.

”a;

 

\

42 I

is not to say that visions began in the Christian era; the present point
of departure is not a starting point which neglects or negates a pre-
Christian vision tradition . It is significant that the use of visions was
given a further valuation in light of the Christian experience that is ger-
mane to all efforts from Christian times . The validity of starting from

this point is evident when one considers that Christianity negates noth-

 

l'“ .
ing of human experience but puts into historical time that which was be- . ’1
fore only archetypal. And, moreover, "for the believer the new meaning
eclipses all the others; it alone valorized the symbol, transfigured it
into revelation . "2 L1.)

 

Mircea Eliade has developed this concept in some depth, and
it is possible to speak of visions within his framework with some in—

teresting results . First of all, Eliade discusses the "gimazy experience

3

of sacred space." He defines it as the primitive religious man's ac-

ceptance of a hierophany, that is, a "manifestation of sacred reality"4
which becomes (concretized in a particular place or space. This sacred
manifestation which is equivalent to p_9_w_er and, in the last analysis, to
reality constitutes a break in the homogeneity of space.5 This break is
symbolized by an opening through which passage from one cosmic region

2
Mircea Eliade, The Sacred and the Profane, trans. Willard R. Trask
(New York: Harcourt, Brace and World, Inc., 1959), p. 11.

3Ibid. , p. 58, Emphases are Eliade's.

4Ibid., p.11.

5
Ibid., pp. 12 and 37.

 

 

\
.

i

.u;

9‘\
u

'.no

..,.. .

 

-1
.-u,‘

--c v.

 

43

to another is made possible -— from heaven to earth and vice versa, and
from earth to the underworld. Communication with heaven is expressed
by one or another of certain images, all of which refer to the axis mundi,
for example, a ladder (Iacob's) , a mountain (Moses') , a tree (Adam and
Eve's, Thor's), a vine, etc. Around this cosmic axis lies the world (our
world) ; hence the axis is located "in the middle" at the "navel of the
earth": it is the "center of the world."6

This break in space or center of the world is not geometrical
space, but existential and sacred space. Therefore, it has an entirely
different structure than a physical one. It admits of an infinite number
of breaks and hence is capable of an infinite number of communications
with the transcendent. 7

Ancient temples were actually built with an opening in the roof
to symbolize the break through from plane to plane, in other words, com-
munication with the transcendent one. Judaism inherited this ancient
Oriental conception of the temple as the copy of a celestial work of
architecture and believed that the Heavenly jerusalem was created by
God at the same time as Paradise, hence in aeternum. Thus the city
of Ierusalem was only an approximate reproduction of the transcendent
model. Christian basilicas , and later cathedrals, take over and continue

these symbolisms . 8

6Eliade, p. 37.

7
Ibid., p. 57.

8
Ibid. , pp. 57-58.

 

.~

.n
u. l
cl‘~.“
‘0‘. R
r' .
"~‘.l"
.n ’A
__.v

 

'2'
‘l
.-" '
\
.-" a
.
~.au~
-“
,rv"

.. ”r
.

 

 

 

44

~It is possible that another receptor of the primitive concept of
sacred space was the vision itself. For visions are hierophanies, mani-
festations of the sacred; they are creators of order out of chaos (the
Annunciation, the Magi's choice of a different route home, Ioseph's
flight to Egypt with Mary and the child, the conversion of Saul); and

they are definitely means of communication with the transcendent being .

 

It is possible to say that the Incarnation, the supreme hierophany,
created in time a new navel of the earth. Thus a close examination of
visions of particular persons is logical, if the persons are closely related ' j
to the prime hierophany and if the visions they receive really do color the

subsequent literary and non-literary vision tradition. These persons are

the apostles Peter and Paul. Paul was born Saul of Tarsus; he is the

apostle born "out of time" who delivered the Christian "good news" to

the Gentiles . His own writings (especially the second letter to the Corin-

thians) and writings about him (The Acts of the Apostles) have pointedly

influenced Christianity on the one hand, and the expressions which this .

new religion acquired, especially in the mystical tradition, on the other.

We shall turn then to a more detailed study of Peter's and Paul's visions

as the embodiment of. the primitive conception of sacred space as further

valorized by the Christian experience. These initiate, or, at least, are

conduits for some of the same traditions present in visions and dream

visions of fourteenth century England.

As with the study of ecstasy, we turn first to Paul's major ec-

.4-0' ‘.‘
. v
ill‘ I!"
\' ~ F
. ,. v.04
Alt...
‘.
”(.1
...
.
j,‘
9..

 

 

 

 

45

static vision which is recorded in II Cor. lZ:1-—4.9 Glosses on the pas-

sage add to our information about visions which take place in an ecstatic

state .

A gloss by Theophanes on Raptus est reads as follows:

Ipsius vide summam demissionem et humilitatem
quomodo tanquam de alio haec recenseat: de
- hoc enim, inquit, gloriabor. At cujus gratis (si
alius raptus est) gloriaris? Itaque haec de
seipso dicit. Arcana verba. Intimationem de
secreta Dei essentia, quasi per verba.
_G_._C_)__. in_P__.__I_._,, CXIV, 568.

See (or note) the great lowering and humbling of
himself, how he recounts these things as if about
another: of this, he says, I shall glory. For whose
favor, (if another was caught up), do you glory?
And so, he says these things about himself. Se—
cretive words. Intimations of the secret essence

of God, as it were through words.

The fact that an ecstatic vision can lead to a real encounter
with the Lord is evident here. The commentator's insistence that Paul
himself experienced the secret essence of God leads to this conclusion.
This point gains importance also when the insistence on knowledge as a

result of ecstatic vision is noticed not only in scripture but also in the

mystic tradition. In this latter case, the terminology may change to mys—

 

filial rapture or complete union with the one or infused contemplation,
but the result is the same.
It should be stated here, also, that 11 Cor. 12:1-4 gives a loca-

tion to ecstatic visions. Besides reminding us of Eliade's conception of

9
See page 10,above.

 

 

 

Ir

46

sacred space, it gives rise to the following commentary which also em-
phasizes that an ecstatic vision can be unitive.
‘The gloss is on usque ad tertium coelum.

Id est, ad cognitionem Deitatis . Primum coelum
est aereum; secundum, firmamentum; tertium
spirituale, ubi angeli et sanctae animae Dei

fruuntur contemplatione .
G.O. in P4122, CXIV, S68.

-—-_—-

That is, to a knowledge of the Deity. The first
heaven is the air (lower atmosphere); the second,
the sky (firmament); the third is spiritual, where
angels and holy persons delight in the contem-
plation of God.

Now, Chrysostom's gloss, quoted and explicated above in re-
gard to St. Peter's ecstatic vision, 10 certifies that the experience can
be communicated to other human beings after the receptor is ret‘umed to
his pre-ecstasy state. This is not true, however, with all ecstatic vi-
sion experiences . St. Paul was able to tell others of his sojourn in Ara-

bia only in the most general terms . This difference here may have to do

with the fact that St. Peter's gained knowledge was intimately connected

With a specific change of policy in the early Church, whereas Paul's had

more to do with the growth of his personal spirit which would ultimately

infuse Christianity .

There are further implications to be drawn from Peter's ecstatic

Vision11 as an examination of two glosses, both by Rabanus Maurus,

W111 point out. The words in superiora are the subject of the glosses.

10
See pp. .13—14.

1
1See p. 13.

 

47

Pro in superiora, alia littera habet, in caena-
culum, et bene: quia gentilis populus est
quasi superior domus: Synagoga vero est infra,
quia mundo immersa.

g_._(_)_. in LL, CXIV, 451.

Instead of "higher parts, " another reading is "in
an upper story or room" and well said: Because
the Gentile people is, as it were, a higher house:
the synagogue in truth is below, because it is
immersed in the world.

Dicens in superiora significavit Eoclesiam, relicta
cupiditate terrenorum, conversationem in caelis
habituram.

 

G.O. in P.L., CXIV, 451.

 

Saying " in the upper parts" he means the Church,
which having left behind the desire of earthly
things , was going to have its dwelling in heaven.

The evident interest in just where Peter's vision occurred seems
to echo Eliade's concern for sacred space. The vision takes place high
in the house , in the upper room, where Peter could contact the transcen-
dent one who was up even higher. The axis mundi here may be said to be

created in the hierophany itself which took place, as the second gloss

indicates, in heaven. A reference to Paul's vision placed it in heaven

tOO. Specifically in the third heaven. In any case, a cosmic break in

the continuum of space occurred in and above the house which lodged

Pe’ter who prayed (communicated with) the transcendent one in an ecstatic

vision, participated in on another plane. that is, in heaven.

In the last chapter we suggested that Paul's initial encounter

' ' 'c
with Christianity on the road to Damascus had something of the ecstati

' ' f
about it. The encounter inself may be classed as a VISIOn. As part 0

 

F-I

—|
48

this vision Christ instructs Paul:

. .Surge, et ingredere civitatem, et ibi dicetur
tibi quid te oporteat facere.
Acts 9:6 (Vulg.)

. . ..Arise, and go into the city, and there it
shall be told thee what thou must do.
Acts 9:7 (Douay)

Rabanus Maurus comments on the word ingredere: Tn]

Ingressurus civitatem terretur ne sanctis tris-
titiam inferat, dehinc Dominus jubetur ingredi,

ut fidem discat quam impugnaverat. ;
G.O. in P.L., CXIV, 448. L.

 

About to enter the city, he fears that he will
bring sadness to the saints; for this reason the
Lord commands him to enter, so that he may
learn the faith which he had persecuted.

This gloss presents some of the effect that Paul's experience may have
had on him immediately. It frightened him because he was being asked
to turn his life around. Peter's experience at Ioppa, discussed above,

also led to a drastic re-ordering of priorities because he opened the

Church to the non-Iewish people as a direct result. It seems , then,

that the vision experience may change the attitudes and life of the re-

ceptor. This result enters the tradition in many literary visions .

In the following verse, the writer continues his narrative of the

aftermath of Paul's vision.

Surrexit autem Saulus de terra, apertisque
oculis nihil videbat. Ad manus autem illum

trahentes , introduxerunt Damascum.
Acts 9:8 (Vulg.)

when his eyes

And Saul arose from the ground:
But they lead-

were opened, he saw nothing.

49

ing him by the hands, brought him to

Damascus.
Acts 9:8 (Douay)

Rabanus Maurus' gloss on the words apertis oculis is noteworthy.

Ostenditur ei in corpore quod prius patiebatur
in anima: Sicut enim apertus oculus sine visu,

sic lex inutilis sine fide Christi.
G.O. in P.L., CXIV, 448.

It is revealed to him in the body what first

he had suffered before in the mind; just as an
open eye without sight, so, in the same way,
the law was useless without faith in Christ.

The commentator here is underlining a psychological truth. We

come to know something first; later we are able to feel or experience and

eventually assimilate, in a totally human way, the implications of our

new knowledge. Thus Paul needs three days of blindness plus fourteen

years in Arabia to become the Paul with whom we are most familiar. In

the same way we can watch Dante's pilgrim grow in knowledge and then

experience, so that the personage of the Paradiso is a much matured ver—

sion of the one of the Inferno.

 

Bede also glosses the words apertis oculis .

Oculis non posset rursus bene videre niSi

prius excaecatus, et propriam sapientiam,

' ' t
uae turbatur excludens, fidei se committera .
q G.O. in P.L., CXIV, 448.

He was not able to see well again until he was
first blinded, and shutting out his own wisdom
which disturbed him, he committed himself to
faith.

Paul gains insight into his vision because his physical sight

is absent for a time. His three days of blindness allow the Light topene-

Fl, .

l;

50

trate him. Therefore, it is not surprising that Paul's internalizing of his
experiences takes place in the dark; nor is it abnormal in any sense that
within the literary tradition of the dream vision, the visions often become
or are identified with dreams , which occur in another form of blindness,
that of sleep.

Acts 9:9 reads as follows:

Et erat ibi tribus diebus non videns, et non
manducavit, neque bibit. (Vulg .)

And he was there three days, without sight,
and he did neither eat nor drink. (Douay)

Rabanus Maurus glosses this verse in such a way as to add
substance to our remarks concerning the benefit of blindness to Paul.

The gloss is on tribus diebus:

Apparet quod per triduum caecatus lucem gratiae
exspectabat, non torpens otio, sed illustratus
a Deo coelestia rimabatur. Credible est quod
etiam eo tempore dispensationem Evangelii

edoctus sit.
G.O. in P.L., CXIV, 448.

It appears that having been blinded for three
days, he was waiting for the light of grace;
not resting as in idleness , but having been
illuminated by God, he was tested by heavenly
things . It is to be believed that even in that
time, he may have been taught the dispensa-

tion of the Gospel.

A further gloss on the words non Videns indicates the didactic

importance of Paul's vision. Didacticism is a familiar aspect of The

Pearl .

The gloss says:

 

51

Quia non credebat Deum tertia die resurgendo
mortem vicisse, suo exemplo instruitur, qui
tenebras tridui luce reversa mutavit.

gig. in _P_:L_._, CXIV, 448.

Because he (Paul) did not believe that God
conquered death by rising on the third day,
he was instructed by his own example, light
having been restored on the third day.

Rabanus Maurus glosses non manducavit from the same verse
as follows:

Hoc animae suae acciderat, quae cibum interiorem
non habuerat et potum. Ex inedia autem corporis
et siti ostenditur animam indigentem satiari opor-

tere.
G.O. in P.L., CXIV, 448.

This had happened to his own soul which had not
had interior food or drink. From the hunger and
thirst of the body, it is shown how an undeserving

spirit ought to be satisfied.

In addition to the didactic aspects of this gloss, it can be
pointed out that the symbolism which is rampant in medieval visions is
probably as old as visions themselves. The implied comparison of body/
Spirit with food/ spiritual food is metaphorically understandable and en—
I'iChing. It tells us , also, that the early Christians regarded the m

as worthy and needful of strengthening as the corpus .

The narrative in Acts continues by introducing a new personage,

Ananias .

Brat autem quidam discipulus Damasci nomine
Ananais: et dixit ad illum in visu Dominus:

Anania. At ille sit: Ecce ergo, Domine.
Acts 9:10 (Vulg.)

Now there was a certain disciple at Damascus

’71

 

K".X'b S3,, ‘ .

 

.- 6-

»: -~«

 

"IynA
h

nu'v

 

o
q,‘
\

 

 

52

named Ananias. And the Lord said to him in
a vision: Ananias. And he said: Behold I
am here,' Lord.

Acts 9:10 (Douay)

The Latin visu translates the Greek horama from hora612 mean-

 

ing to stare at, that is, to discern clearly. By extension the word has
been used to mean to attend to. This same root is present in verse 9

above and in verse 12 which reads:

Et vidit virum Ananiam nomine, introeuntem
et imponentem sibi manus ut visum recipiat.
Acts 9:12 (Vulg.)

And he saw a man named Ananias coming in, and
he put his hands upon him that he might receive
his s_ig_t_i_.

Acts 9:12 (Douay)

It can be said then that the vision of Paul and the one of Ananias
were experiences by which they came to discern something clearly. And
Paul's lack of sight in verse 9 indicates not only physical blindness but
psychological and spiritual blindness as well. Paul, in verse 9, cannot
yet discern the truth clearly.

To turn once again to the narrative line in the ninth chapter of
Acts, Christ answers Ananias' fears about confronting Paul by telling him
that Paul is his chosen instrument. Ananias goes to Paul and addresses
him as the Lord commanded and touches him. With the falling of scales

from Paul's eyes, his vision is restored .

Et confestim ceciderunt ab oculis ejus tamquam
squamae, et visum recepit: et surgens bap-

12
Strong, nos. 3705, 3708.

53

tizatus est.
Acts 9:18 (Vulg.)

And immediately there fell from his eyes as it
were scales, and he received his sight; and
rising up, he was baptized.

Acts 9:18 (Douay)

Bede glosses ceciderunt as follows:
Serpentis corpus squamiis tegitur, etc. usque
ad quod lumen recepit in mente.
G.O. in P.Lo’ CXIV, 448-4490
His body was covered with the scales of the
serpent, etc. , until he recovered the light in
his mind.

The implication here is that Paul's pre-conversion state was
analogous to that of the serpent of the temptation. There is also implied
the concept that light can be recovered in one's mind or spirit —- again
the almost pun-like insistence on the relationship of sight and insight.
Visions unfailingly end in insight.

Rabanus Maurus , in a gloss on the same word, reports:

Quod cadunt squamae, similitudo est interioris
visionis renovatae de legis velamine.

G.O. in P.L., CXIV, 449.

The fact that the scales fall, is a similitude of
the interior vision freed from the veil of the law.

The likeness is of the interior insight and the covering on the law. The
law cannot be known if it is covered over; Paul cannot know the truth
until the covering of old attitudes and beliefs is removed and grace can
provide him with insight. Implied in this quotation, also, is the rending

of the veil (velum) in the Temple during the crucifixion, which signifies

 

54

the superseding of the Law.
Rabanus Maurus is , of course, completing the analogy he began

13 in which he said that the law is useless With—

in the gloss on Acts 9:8
out faith. The removal of the covering of the Law is, by implication,
the development of the knowledge of the spirit as opposed to the mere
letter of the law. The covering of the Law is likened to the actual phy-
sical scales which were covering Paul's eyes and preventing him from
seeing. The removal of the scales refers to the change of attitude which
Paul underwent when he "lost" his prejudice against the Christian com-
munity and "gained" knowledge of its real import. In other words, this
imagery reinforces our premise that as a result of this experience, Paul
changed his point of view. The Visionary of The Pearl undergoes an
analogous change of attitude regarding the salvation of little children.
In Acts 9:27, Barnabas in presenting Paul to the apostles tells

them that Paul has §e_e_n_ the Lord -- another indication of the realness of
the experience of visions . And, moreover, the verb chosen to indicate
the seeing has implications which further substantiate our growing under-
standing of visions as total experiences . The text reads:

Barnabas autem apprehensum illum duxit ad

Apostolos: et narravit illis quomodo in via

vidisset Dominum, et quia locutus est ei, et

quomodo in Damasco fiducaliter egerit in

nomine Iesu.

Acts 9:27 (Vulg .)

But Barnabas took him, and brought him to the

13See above, pp. 48-49.

 

55

apostles and told them how he had seen the
Lord, and that he had spoken to him; and how
in Damascus he had dealt confidently in the
name of Iesus.

Acts 9:27 (Douay)

The Latin vidisset translates the primary verb eidgwhich Strong
notes is used only in certain past tenses. These have the meaning of
seeing figuratively or literally and, by implication, in the perfect tense
only, mean to know. 14 The verb in question is in the perfect tense.

Thus Paul did not merely _s__e_e_ the Lord; he gained a knowledge of him.

In Chapter X of the Acts the reader is exposed to other visions --

this time those of Cornelius and Peter. These are especially relevant

because of the use of the word trance, that is , ecstasy, in regard to

them. The text follows:

Vir autem quidam erat in Caesarea, nomine Cornelius,
centurio cohortis, quae dicitur Italica. Religiosus,
ac timens Deum cum omni domo sua, faciens eleemo-
synas multas plebi, et deprecans Deum semper: Is
vidit in visu manifeste, quasi hora diei nona, An—
gelum Dei introeuntem ad se, et decentem, sibi,
Corneli. At ille intuens eum, timore correptus,
dixit: Quid est, Domine: Dixit autem illi: Ora-
tiones tuae, et eleemosynae tuae ascenderunt in
memoriam in conspectu Dei.

Acts 10:1-4 (Vulg.)

And there was a certain man in Caesarea, named
Cornelius , a centurion of that which is called the
Italian band; a religious man, and fearing God with
all his house, giving much alms to the people, and
always praying to God. This man saw a vision mani-
festly, about the ninth hour of the day, an angel of
God, coming in unto him, and saying to him, Cor-
nelius. And, he, beholding him, being seized with

14
Strong , no . 1492 .

“a- ”j
J

 

56

fear said: What is it, Lord? And he said to him:
Thy prayers and thy alms are ascended for a
memorial in the sight of God.

Acts 10:1-4 (Douay)

Rabanus Maurus comments on Is vidit by insisting that Comelius'
experience happened neither in the night nor in a dream. He also insists
that Comelius' vision was modeled after those of Peter and john.

Non in nocte non in somnis, quia Gentiles grosso

sensu, etc. usgue ad sicut prius in Petri et
Ioannis exemplo ostensium fuit.

G.O. in P.L., CXIV, 450. a

 

Thus, by the time of this gloss , some recognition of visions as j
realities which occur and are different from dreams in sleep or other hap-

penings in the night is apparent.

A subsequent gloss on verse 7 continues this distinction in a

different way .

Et cum discessisset Angelus , qui loqueb‘atur'illi,
vocavit suos domesticos suos, et militem metuentem
Dominum ex his, qui illi parebant.

Acts 10:7 (Vulg.)

And when the angel who spoke to him was departed,
he called two of his household servants, and a
soldier who feared the Lord, of them that were
under him.

Acts 10:7 (Douay)

Non ait, cum evigilasset Cornelius, quia ei nec
per somnium, nec in exstasi, sed manifeste an—
gelus Visus est.

G.O. in P.L. , CXIV, 450.
This is not to say, in regard to Cornelius' staying
awake, for he was neither in sleep nor in ecstasy;
yet the angel was seen manifestly.

This commentary implicitly distinguishes Cornelius' vision from

57

a dream which occurs in sleep, and, further, also from an ecstatic vi-
sion which, as we have noted, applies to Peter's vision which comes im—
mediately after Cornelius' in Acts . Cornelius' vision is perhaps a cor-

poreal vision in Augustine's terms .1

In a later passage, Acts 12:7, a whole new dimension is added
to the concept of vision. This verse describes Peter in prison where he
experiences a vision during which he is led out of the place of captivity.

His response follows:

Et Petrum ad se reversus, dixit: Nunc scio vere
quia misit Dominus Angelum suum, et eripuit me
de manu Herodis, et de omni exspectatione plebis

Iudaeorum.
Acts 12:7 (Vulg.)

And Peter coming to himself said: Now I know in
very deed that the Lord hath sent his Angel, and
hath delivered me out of the hand of Herod, and

from all the expectations of the people of the jews .
Acts 12:7 (Douay)

A Gloss on Ad se reversus states:

 

A culmine contemplationis ad hoc reversus est,

quod in intellectu communi prius fuit.
G.O. in P.L., CXIV, 454.

ion, he is returned to

From the peak of contemplat .
n understanding

the present, to that state in commo
where he was at first.

The striking thing here is the identification of the state of ec-

Static vision with contemplation. This latter concept is one which will

hear much investigation not only as to its identity, but as it exists in

15 -
See below, p. 99 ff.

 

58

the writing by and about the mystics . For it seems likely that the mys-
tical tradition carried as part of its make-up, the tradition of visions .
A development of this aspect will be presented below.

In this same vision to Peter in prison, an angel stands by Peter
and a light shines in the room to awaken the sleeping apostle. (Acts 12:7)
A gloss on the word light (_l_u_me_n_) in this verse points out the selective
aspects of the vision —— that is , the fact that visions are intended for
certain people, and other people, even though they are physically present,
do not experience them. This quality of the vision also occurs in Paul's
on his way to Damascus; the soldiers accompanying him did not see the

Lord. The gloss on Peter's vision follows:

Signum praesentiae angeli Dei cujus praesenti soli

Petro lumen praebebat, nec aliis refulgebat.
G.O. in P.L. , CXIV, 454.

The light showed the sign of the presence of the
angel of God only to Peter, not to the others .

In a kind of transposition of the theme of the relationship be-

tween sight and insight, we read in Acts 13:11 that one Bar-Iesus became

blind because he would not believe Paul. Paul says in part:

Et nunc ecce manus Domini super te, et eris
caecus , non videns solem usque ad tempus .
Et confestim cecidit in eum caligo, et tenebrae,

et circuiens quaerebat qui ei manum daret.
Acts 13:11 (Vulg.)

And now behold, the hand of the Lord is upon
thee, and thou shalt be blind, not seeing the .
sun for a time. And immediately there fell a mist
and darkness upon him, and going about, he

sought some one to lead him by the hand.
' Acts 13:11 (Douay)

 

59

Another theme is repeated in the description of Paul in Acts 13:47 .

Sic enim praecepit nobis Dominus: Posui te in
lucem gentium, ut sis in salutem usque ad ex—
tremum terrae.

Acts 13:47 (Vulg.)

For so the Lord has commanded us: I have set

thee to be the light of the gentiles; that thou

Kmayest be for salvation unto the utmost part of

the earth.

Acts 13:47 (Douay)

The lumen (light) which is applied to Paul looks back at the title given to
Christ in the gospels , Light of the world. It also emphasizes the sight/
insight theme in a particularly potent way. The Latin lumen translates

the Greek phés from the obsolete phas meaning to shine or make mani-

fe_st, eSpecially by rays; it also carries the meaning of luminousness

 

which in its widest application can be natural or artificial, abstract or

 

1
concrete, literal or figurative.

In the sixteenth chapter of Acts we read that Paul had a vision

which occurred in the night.

Et visio per noctem Paulo ostensa est, etc.
Acts 16:9 (Vulg.)

And a vision was shown to Paul in the night, etc.
Acts 16:9 (Douay)

This Quotation re-introduces the theme of sight/blindness in addition to

recalling that, within the tradition, visions did occur in the mode of

sleep .

. . . . ur
AUGUStine has a very interesting gloss on ViSions which occ

16
Strong. no. 5457.

 

60

in sleep. It is in reference to Gen. 2:21 and out of the main stream of
our interest, but carries the imprint of one of the most influential of all
commentators and the developer of the theory of visions which we still
have.

Immisit ergo Dominus Deus soporem in Adam:
cumque obdormisset, tulit unam de costis ejus ,
et replevit camem pro ea .

Gen 2:21(Vulg.)

Then the Lord God cast a deep sleep upon
Adam: And when he was fast asleep, he took

one of his ribs, and filled up flesh for it.
Gen. 2:21 (Douay)

The gloss is on the words immisit ergo Dominus.

Non possunt haec corporeis oculis videri.
Sed quanto quis a visibilibus ad secreta in—
telligentiae quasi obdormiendo secesserit,
melius et sincerius videt, et. usgue ad et

Ecclesiae referenda.
G.O. in P.L., CXIII, 89-90.

These things cannot be seen with corporeal eyes .
The further one departs from visible things to

the hidden things of the understanding as in
sleeping -- the better and more clearly he sees.

This illustration is included to re-iterate from another angle

that dreams as well as ecstatic visions can lead to clearer understanding --

that the results of visions are not necessarily controlled by the mode in

Which they occur.

In Acts 22:6, Paul retells his conversion story for the benefit of

the people of Tyre. In so doing the writer has developed even further

the implications of light. In 22:9. for example, we find:

 

61

Et qui mecum erant, lumen quidem viderunt . . .
Acts 22:9 (Vulg.)

And they that were with me saw indeed the light . . .
Here Paul is differentiating his experience from that of the soldiers who
accompanied him to Damascus . The soldiers saw only the light -- the
sign of the vision —- not the vision itself. This light Sign seems to join
with the cloud covering the mountain where Moses' hierophany occurred
and, perhaps, the light which prostrated Peter, james, and john at the

Transfiguration .
In verse 11, Paul continues and says:

Et cum non viderum prae claritate luminis illius, etc.
Acts 22:11 (Vulg.)

And whereas I did not see for the brightness of

the light, etc.
Acts 22:11 (Douay)

So the theme of blindness resulting from th

duced. Of course, Paul is also implying.

of the Lord by a human person may result in blindness or death. In the

literary vision tradition, this issue is frequently broached by various

writers . The Pearl poet's pilgrim, although he gazes at the Lamb, sees

only the outward signs of divinity, not the Son of God himself. Thus.

he can return to normal life.

Paul, before Agrippa, uses the lumen in yet another sense. He

is speaking of his mission.

um, ut convertantur a tenebris
d deu, ut
et sortem

Aperire oculos eor
ad lucem, et de potestate satanae a

accipiant remissionem peccatorum,

e intensity of the light is intro-

on another level, that a vision

 

62

inter sanctos per fidem, quae est in me.
Acts 22:18 (Vulg.)

To open their eyes , that they may be con-
verted from darkness to light, and from the power
of Satan to God, that they may receive forgive-
ness of sins , and a lot among the saints , by the
faith that is in me.

Acts 22:18 (Douay)

Thus, conversion to the truth is one from darkness to light: Satan is 1
darkness; God is Light; reception and acceptance of the Light results in

forgiveness of sins and a permanent place in sacred space because of

 

 

faith. Verse 23 continues: '4

Si passibilis Christus, si primus ex resur-
rectione mortuorum, lumen annuntiaturus est
populo, et gentibus .

Acts 22:23 (Vulg.)

That Christ should suffer, and that he should
be the first to rise from the dead, and should
show light to the people, and to the gentiles .
Acts 22:23 (Douay)
Ultimately, then, the Light emanates from the risen Christ.
Another record of a Pauline personal ecstasy follows:
Factum est autem reverti mihi in jerusalem, et
oranti in temple, fieri me in stupore mentis.
Acts 22:17 (Vulg.)
And it came to pass, that as I was come again
to Ierusalem, and was praying in the temple,
that I was in a trance.
Acts 22:17 (Douay)
It is noteworthy that, although the Vulgate uses stupore mentis instead

of excessus, as above, the original Greek word is ekstasis. The dif-

ference in Latin word choice does not create a real difference in meaning.

 

63

Yet another vision is recorded in Acts 23:11:

Sequenti autem nocte assistens ei Dominus, ait:

Constans esto: sicut enim testificatus es de me

in Ierusalem, sic te oportet et Romae testificari.
Acts 23:11 (Vulg.)

And the night following the Lord standing by him,

said: Be constant; for as thou hast testified of

me in Ierusalem so thou must bear witness also

at Rome.

Acts 23:11 (Douay)

This vision is interesting because it is more like Cornelius' vision than
the one recorded in Acts 22 . Paul's usual visions are manifestations of
the Lord by which experience, that is , knowledge is gained. This one,
however, is more like a message. Thus, some visions have nothing of

the ecstatic about them.

Paul before Agrippa reports that Christ in his initial vision to

Paul said in part:

Sed exsurge, et sta super pedes tuos: ad hoc
enim apparui tibi, ut constituam te ministrum,
et teste eorum, quae vidisti et eorum, quibus
apparebo tibi.

Acts 26:16 (Vulg.)

But rise up, and stand upon thy feet; for to this
end have I appeared to thee, that I may make thee
a minister and a witness of these things which
thou hast seen and of those things wherein I will
appear to thee.
Acts 26:16 (Douay)
From this report, it seems that the primary purpose of Paul's
initial vision was not for Paul alone, but for those he would serve. How-

ever, the teacher-servant must first possess the faith he would propagate.

Paul would be an instrument through which life would flow to others .

 

 

' . ... '1'
.»r s

 

you.
I >\
i...-

,9...

...1 .-.v

I-::l: I

~-‘ 6 ya.

 

"with
t .

I...L.
-

In. .1

r.s..

ml,

'on,
‘

'.~..

 

 

64

His visions are a source of the grace which is dispensed through him.
Strong17 records that the optomai from which Ierome translates

the apparui of the Latin is by definition to know and the apparebo trans—

lates a past tense of £116; meaning to know. Thus Paul puts these words

into the mouth of Christ: "to this end have I manifested (made known)

 

myself to thee . . . and of those things wherein Iwill reveal (make I“.
known) to thee. " i

The use of the vision as a literary device can be found in the

 

early Christian writings outside of commentaries or glosses on specific ‘ J
scriptural passages . The existence of these writings and the widespread L 5
popularity of some of them points, once again, to a vision tradition. An
indication of some of the more important of these writings is our next
topic.
One of the earliest of these extra-scriptural works is the apo-
CI'thal apoCalypse usually called "The Shepherd of Hermes. " Part of
this work seems to go back to the time of Clement I, a first century
bishop of Rome; and the later section is attributed to the reign of Pius 1
whose pontificate fell within 140-150 A.D.18
Of more importance to our subject than the early date of the ex-

tant incomplete Greek text, two Latin and one Ethiopic version of the

work, is the fact that this book of revelations takes the form of a series

17
Strong, nos. 3700, 1492.

1
8Iohannes Quasten, Petrology: Vol. I: The Beginnings of Patristic
Literature (Westminister: The Newman Press, 1950), p. 92.

 

'. «4-

_....-b

..- V.

p.
.,. rm:

y...-
,. v

 

. A
'.u‘ ev-
DQIF f
.
06" \

 

 

 

 

65

of visions. It is important to note that in this very early work, the
agents of the revelations are two heavenly figures -- neither of whom
are Christ or God. The first figure is an old woman who is a physical
representation of the Church. In the course of the first part, she grad-
ually casts off her signs of age and emerges in the fourth vision as a
bride, one of the elect of God. In the fifth vision of the work, an angel {‘1
of penance in the guise of a shepherd appears to the narrator. It is from

. 1
thlS second figure that the work gets its title. 9

L '

 

The dogmatic and ethical teachings of the Shepherd are not im— f '
r J
portant to our consideration. The point is that very early in the Christian
tradition, the vision, as a form by which man communicated with per-
sonages of heavenly origin to receive revelations, explanations and com-
mands, is a viable form. The fact that the personage of the first four
visions becomes a bride figure makes her a possible precursor for the
Pearl Maiden herself.

Ierome states that ”The Shepherd of Hermes" was almost un—
known in the West; therefore the extent to which it was known in the
middle ages is debatable.

Another interesting example of vision literature from the very
early Christian era is "The Passion of Perpetua and Felicitas" from the

first Acts of the Martyrs .20 This account gains authenticity for its early

19
Quasten, I, pp. 92—94.

20
Ibid, p. 181.

 

,.
.-;‘;'\

o.“ '

. -r‘ '1'
“ u‘

‘.'-u; ‘

 

.vh‘F

\
,,.... u-

... I‘!‘
..

u: NV

a-‘Clfi

v-blv

D'AA
q

-'vv-

t-b
1‘ ¢

“.4

.a-

I15,

 

66

readers because the largest part of it is purported to be Perpetua's own
diary which she left in her own hand.21 Moreover, there is some evi—
dence that some of the chapters and the editing were done by Tertulllan
himself.22 St. Augustine is at pains to tell his readers that these Acts
are not on the same level as the canonical scriptures.23 The necessity
of such a warning attests to the popularity of the work.

In the work, Perpetua asks for her first vision. She does so
because she knows herself to be one who "was privileged to converse
with the Lord ."24 That Perpetua was mystic can easily be implied from
such a statement. Perpetua has several more visions in which she learns
in beautifully wrought symbolism of her own impending martyrdom, and
of the salvation of her brother whom she sees in a pool of water. Her
companion Saturus also records a vision.

St. Augustine puts this apocryphal work in the tradition of ec—
static visions with the following commentary:

"Where was she when assaulted?" cried
Augustine, referring to this incident when
wild bulls tore her. She appeared to know
nothing about it and asked when she was
to have her tussle with the wild cow. To

her surprise she was told it was all over and
could not believe it till she looked down and

21Wallis, trans . , "The Martyrdom of Perpetua and Felicitas, " in The
ALE-Nicene Fathers, Chap. 1, par. 1.
22
Quasten, I, 181.
De anima et eius origine, I, 10. 12. quoted in QuaSten. I. 181.

24
Wallis , trans . , "The Martyrdom of Perpetua and Felicitas, " Chap. 1,
par. 3 . '

 

67

saw her torn body and bleeding wounds.

And torn by so furious a wild beast, with-
out feeling her wounds, after that furious
combat, she asked when it would begin?
Why did she not see what all the world saw?
What did she enjoy who did not feel such
pain? By what love, by what vision, by
what potion was she so transported out of
herself, and as it were, divinely inebriated,
to seem without feeling in a mortal body?25

Yet another work of interest to this study is attributed to
Clement, who, traditionally, is a friend of Peter and his successor as

Bishop of Rome. It is the Pseudo—Clementine described by Quasten as

 

"a comprehensive novel with a didactic purpose whose protagonist is

Clement of Rome . " 2 6

This narrative in the last analysis is merely an
introduction to the missionary sermons of St. Peter of which twenty are
extant. Of these, Homily 17, Chapters 14—19, are especially to our
Point because herein St. Peter homilizes on the value and authenticity
of visions .2 7

However, "the writer . . . seems to have had no intention of
presenting his statements as facts; but, choosing the disciples of Christ
and their followers as his principal characters, he has put into their
mouths the most important of his beliefs, and woven the whole together

Sister Sylvia Mary, Pauline and Iohannine Mysticism (London: Dar-
ton, Longman and Todd, 1964). P- 39-

25
Quasten , I, 114 .

7"
An The Clementine Homilies: Homily 17, Chapters 13—19" in The
lie-Nicene Fathers, VIII, 321-324.

 

 

.Ao-v “‘
'r

““le r‘v
‘.A‘fi ‘0

\
an!” ‘

 

\v -r-‘
-

... .klu
.

.«ppn

v‘ruvv

'2'?‘

e...”

’.’.
a

'rA.

68

by a thread of fictitious narrative. "28

In the homily under discussion, Simon Magus plays the ques-
tioner to Peter. Simon maintains that one can learn more surely from a
vision than from seeing with one's own eyes and hearing with one's own
ears. His argument is that a vision or apparition doesn't merely present
an object to view, but inspires him who sees it with confidence, for it
comes from God.

Peter replies that the opposite is true because an evil demon
or a deceptive spirit may pretend to be from God in a vision. Simon then
maintains that only the just have true visions . Peter calls this false and
at first backs down from proving it to Simon because of the latter’s ig-

norance.
Then, in Chapter 16, Peter proves his argument by maintaining
that a just man does not see God face to face and live.

Bt Petrus: Mei, inquit, sum memor, quod promiserim
ostendere, et ea de re absque Scripturis ac per
Scripturas demonstratienem exhibere. Et nunc loquen-
tem audi. Novimus multos (si quidem aequo animo
accipis, alioquin astantes judices habeo) idolorum
cultores et adulteros ac onmimo peccatores con-
spexisse visa atque vera somnio, nonnullos vero
daemonum visiones . Non enim dico a mortalium
oculis videri posse incorpoream Patris aut Filii
Speciem, quia maximo lumine resplendet. Unde ab
homine in carnem converso non cerni, non est
invidentis Dei, sed miserantis . Nam qui viderit,
vivere non potest. Luminis quippe exsuperantia

8
A Thomas Smith, "Introduction to Pseudo-Clementine Writings, " in
nte-Nicene Fathers, VIII, 73.

29,'
The Clementine Homilies," Chap. 13. p- 322-

 

 

69

cementis dissolvit carnem, praeterquam si Dei
ineffabili virtute caro vertatur in luminis naturam,
quo possit lumen videre, a carne. Nam Patrem
intueri absque conversione, ad solum Filium
pertinet. Ad justos autem non simili modo. In resur-
rectione enim mortuorum, quando corporibus mutati
in lumen erunt angelis aequales , tunc poterunt cer-
nere. Denique et si angelorum aliquis, ut videatur
ab homine, missus fuerit, mutatur in carnem, ut
per carnem cemi possit. Incorpoream siquidem
virtutem non solum Filii, sed nec angeli nemo
potest cernere. Sin vero nonnullus visionem con-
spexerit, mali daemonis earn esse intelligat.
Lg” II, 398-399.

.misfi

And Peter said: "I remember that I promised to
prove this point, and to give my proofs in regard "'
to it from Scripture andapart from Scripture. And E, ,1
now listen to what I say. We know that there are
many (if you will pardon me the statement; and if
you don't, I can appeal to those who are present

as judges) who worship idols, commit adultery, and
sin in every way, and yet they see true visions and
dreams , and some of them have also apparitions of
demons . For I maintain that the eyes of mortals
cannot see the incorporeal form of the Father or
Son, because it is illumined by exceeding great
light. Wherefore it is not because God envies,

but because He pities, that He cannot be seen by
man who has been turned into flesh. For he who
sees God cannot live. For the excess of light dis-
solves the flesh of him who sees; unless by the
secret power of God the flesh be changed into the
nature of light, so that it can see light or the sub—
stance of light be changed into flesh, so that it

can be seen by flesh. For the power to see the
Father, without undergoing any change, belongs to
the Son alone. But the just shall also in like man—
ner behold God; for in the resurrection of the dead,
when they have been changed, as far as their bodies
are concerned, into light, and become like the an-
gels, they shall be able to be seen by flesh. For
no one can see the incorporeal power not only of
the Son, but not even of an angel. But if one sees
an apparition, he should kygw that his is the ap-
parition of an evil demon.

 

30"
The Clementine Homilies." Chap. 16. pp- 321-323-

70

Peter's final conclusion in Chapter 19 is that Simon has not
really seen the Lord because his actions belie him.

Itaque si tibi etiam Iesus noster in viso conspectus
apparuit ac locutus est, tanquam adversario iratus,
ideo visa et insomnia, vel quoque per extrinsecas
revelationes dis seruit. An vero potest aliquis per
visionem institui ad doctrinam? Quod si dicas posse,
quare per annum integrum cum vigilantibus permaneas
colloctus est Dominus? Bt quo pacto tibi hoc ipsum
credamus , quod tibi apparuerit. Et quo modo tibi
apparuerit, cum contraria illius doctrinae sentias?
Sin vero ab 1110 per unam horam visitatus ac edoctus,
factus es apostolus, voces illius praedica, illius
scita interpretare, illius apostolos ama, mihi qui
cum eo versatus sum ne bellum indicas. Nam contra
me, firmam petram et Ecclesiae fundamentum, adversarius
restitisti. Nisi esses adversarius, profecto de me
detrahens , praedicationem meam probris non insectareris,
ut qui dico quae ipse astans a Domino audivi, non
credar, quasi scilicet condemnationem merear, quamvis
laudari debeam. Aut si me reum dicis , Deum qui mihi
Christum revelavit accusas , et in eum qui me propter
revelationem beatum praedicavit inveheris. Sed si
quidem vere cupis adminiculari veritati, primum a
nobis disce, quae nos ab eo didicimum, et factus
veritatis discipulus" fias noster adjutor.

Lg. , II, 402—403.

If, then,our Iesus appeared to you in a vision,

made Himself known to you, and spoke to you, it was
as one who is enraged with an adversary; and this is
the reason why it was through visions and dreams ,

or through revelations that were from without, that
He spoke to you. But can any one be rendered fit

for instruction through apparitions ? And if you will
say, "It is possible,’ then I ask 'Why did our teach—
er abide and discourse a whole year to those who were
awake?‘ And how are we to believe your word, when
you tell us that He appeared to you? And how did He
appear to you, when you entertain opinions contrary
to His teaching? But if you were seen and taught by
Him, and became His apostle for a single hour, pro-
claim His utterances, interpret His sayings, love
His apostles , contend not with me who companied
with Him? For in direct opposition to me, who am

 

71

a firm rock, the foundation of the Church, you
now stand . If you were not opposed to me, you
would not accuse, and revile the truth proclaimed
by me, in order that I may not be believed when I
state what I myself have heard with my own ears
from the Lord, as if I were evidently a person that
was condemned and in bad repute. But if you say
I am condemned, you bring an accusation against
God , who revealed the Christ to me, and you in-
veigh against Him who pronounced me blessed on
account of the revelation. But if, indeed, you
really wish to work in the cause of truth, learn
first of all from us what we have learned from Him,
and, becoming a disciple of the truth, become a
fellow-worker with us . "

The brief excerpts from The Pseudo-Clementines exhibit a con-
tinual interest on the part of the early Christians as to how God reveals
himself to men and whether a man may see God and live. Implicitly, we

are already face—to-face with the medieval critic's problem. In The

-———

 

Pearl, the Visionary does not see God and lives; the Dante of The Divine
Comedy sees God and lives to tell of his pilgrimage but not of the ex-
perience of God directly.

As interesting as these early writings have proved to be, the
one to which we should give most of our attention, the one which most
surely is the center of the vision tradition from the fourth to the fourteenth
century is theVisio PauliJ called by James The Apocalypse of Paul.32

This work has been given various titles throughout its history.

Theodore Silverstein, who did a major study of the various extant texts

1..
The Clementine Homilies," Chap. 19, pp. 323—324.

The Apocryphal New Testament, trans. M.R. Iames (1924; corrected
Oxford: The Clarendon Press, 1953).

 

1.! '
u

er'

,-
..o .

mi." "
.v‘

[ti
0 s
l

as

. "
’z—I
yd!

. o-np
.
0-. .V:

 

 

in:
~J

72

containing the poem, calls it the Visio Sancti Pauli.33 Finally, St. Augus—

 

tine refers to it as the " Revelation of Paul" in his condemnation of it.
Silverstein states that the Apocalypse of Paul was written in
Greek, probably by an Egyptian of as early as the third century. It was
reissued some time after 388 with a preface that sought to support the
authority of the book by relating the story of its miraculous discovery in r-1
Tarsus. The chief sources of the work are the apocalypses of Peter, ‘

Elias, Zaphariah; much of the content of them is transmitted in the Apo—

 

calypse of Paul.34 J

The importance of this work increased from the eighth century
so that it became one of the chief formative elements in the development

of the later legends of Heaven and Hell which culminated in the Divine

 

My of Dante who seems to have known some form of the Apocalypse

at first hand. There are echoes of it in the works of Chaucer who was in—

fluenced directly through the Purgatory of St. Patrick, its English-Irish

Pendant.35

Its widespread influence can also be measured by the number of

earlier medieval visions in which its influence is perceptible, sometimes

faintly, often very plainly indeed. Another measure of its influence is

Visio Sancti Pauli: The History of the Apocalypse in Latin Together
With Nine Texts (London: Christophers, 1935).

 

Silverstein , p . e .

es a particular instance of the influence of
In an early canto of the "Infer—
"Chosen Vessel" to Hell --

3
5Ibid. M.R. Iames cit
the Apocalypse on the Divine Comedy.
no," (11, 28) Dante mentions the visit of the

an undoubted allusion to the Apocalypse.

 

 

.
...«o“"
Lair

”Iv“. ,«
y

‘15“

In.

73

recorded in the constant ooposition it met from ecclesiastical authorities .
Sozomen, for example, is quoted by Iames as saying:

The book now circulated as the Apocalypse of Paul
the apostle, which none of the ancients ever say,
is commended by most monks; but some contend that
this book was found in the reign we write of [Theo—
dosius] . For they say there was found underground
at Tarsus of Cilicia, in Paul's house, a marble
chest, and that it was this book. However, when

I inquired about this, a Cilician, a priest of the
Church of Tarsus, told me it was a lie. He was

a man whose gray hairs showed him to be of cor.-
siderable age, and he said that no such thing had
happened in their city and that he wondered whether
the tale (or the book) had not been made up by

heretics . 36
Ecclesiastical History, vii, 19.

And Saint Augustine in reference to II. Cor. 12:20 in his TraCta-

37
U1_Sloannes XCVIII, Chap. XVI, par. 8, condemns it soundly.

Quanquam et inter ipsos spirituales sunt utique
aliis alii capaciores atque meliores; ita ut
quidam illorum ad ea pervenerit quae non licet
homini loqui. Qua occasione vani quidam
Apocalypsim Pauli, quam sana non recipit Ecclesia,
nescio quibus fabulis plenam, stultissima prae-
sumptione finxerunt; dicentes hanc esse unde
dixerat raptum se fuisse in tertium coelum, et
illic audisse ineffabilia verba quae non licg
homin'i logu_i (II Cor. 12:2 , 4) Utcumque illorum
tolerabilis esset audacia, si se audisse dixisset
quae adhuc non licet homini loqui: cum veno
dixerit, quae non licet homini lggu‘y' isti qui sunt

qui haec qudeant impudenter et infeliciter loqui?
P.L. , XXXV, 1885.

 

 

. . . Although even among the spiritual themselves
there are some, doubtless , who are of greater ca-
pacity and in a better condition than others ; so

6
Quoted in James, p. 525.

37Cited by Silverstein, p. 4; Migne. P.L.. XXXV. 1885.

 

‘1' 'L"'ov.

74

that one of them attained even to things

of which it is not lawful for a man to speak.
Taking advantage of which, there have been
some vain individuals, who, with a presump-
tion that betrays the greatest folly, have
forged a Revelation of Paul, crammed with all
manner of fables, which has been rejected by
the Orthodox Church; affirming it to be whereof
he had said that he was caught up into the
third heaven, and there heard unspeakable
words "which it is not lawful for a man to ut-
ter. " Nevertheless , the audacity of such might
be tolerable had he said that he heard words
which it is not yet lawful for a man to utter;
but when he said, "which it is not lawful for

a man to utter, " who are they that dare to ut-
ter them with such impudence and non-success?

The very number of the objections to the work indicates the
39 _ .
strength of its appeal. Moreover, it is related in content to the homi—
lies of Origen (Psalmos,V) and Marcarius of Egypt (#XXII) on the fate

of souls at death, as well as to the " Revelation of Esdras, " and to a

direct source of the ”Apocalypse of the Virgin, " and perhaps in part to

the Slavonic Enoch. It seems, finally, to have influenced the Testament

of Abraham as well as several of the visions that were current in the

West during the late Middle Ages . Therefore, it linked the other-world

lore of the first Christian centuries with that of the twelfth to the fif-

teenth,40 And, finally, right to the point of this study, within three cen—

38Quoted in A Select Library of the Nicene and Post—Nicene Father;

9_f_the Christian Churth VII, 380.

 

bricus , diex apocryphgs
I, 943-953, as bringing
ient collection .

39
Silverstein, note #14, p. 93, cites Fa
Hoyt Testamenti (2nd ed. , Hamburg, 1719).
together many of the objections in a conven

40
Silverstein, p. 3.

 

7S

turies of the time of its re-issue (after 380), it had penetrated to England
where Aldhelm echoes the traditional disapproval, not without a little
regret.

The Apocalypse appealed not because of its style which is de-

 

scribed as ill-proportioned and full of repetitions , nor because of its
originality -- its author seldom rose above a blundering and barely dis-
guised plagiarism, but for its contents. It is the most inclusive of the
apocalypses , seems the most reliable, and is of the greatest interest to
42
the living as to the conditions of existence in other worlds .
Silverstein concludes part of his study by saying:

Whatever the reasons and circumstances the Apocalypse

was in fact successful, especially in western Europe.

Here, at first in the long texts which preserved with

some fullness the contents of thr fourth century ori-

ginal, and later in a group of abbreviated reductions,

its career proceeded without interruption for more

than a thousand years. The simplest indication of

this continuity is to be found century by century

in the evidence of texts and manuscripts or of

references in various ecclesiastical writings .

It seems evident, therefore, that the Apocalypse of Paul, a ba-

Sic vision in structure, informed the literary tradition of which The Pearl
is one culmination. To apply a general statement of Iames, one may con-

clude that this bit of apocrypha "exercised an influence (wholly dispro-

portionate to [its] intrinsic value) so great and so widespread. that no

41
Di laudibus virginitatis in P .L. , LXXXIX, 721—722 .

42
Silverstein, p. 5.

43Ibid.

 

 

.
... rm

I
1

Va

-v

pa

1 I

 

76

one who cares about the history of Christian thought and Christian art
. , 44
can posmbly afford to neglect it."

The Apocalypse itself begins with the expected quotation from

 

II Con:

. . . but I will come to the visions and revelations
of the Lord. I know a man in Christ about fourteen
years ago (whether in the body, I know not, or out
of the body, I know not: God knoweth), such an one
rapt even to the third heaven. And I know such a
man (whether in the body or out of the body, I can—
not tell: God knoweth): That he was caught up in-
to paradise, and heard secret words, which it is
not granted to man to utter.

II. Cor. 12:1-4 (Douay)

Paragraphs one and two deal with the finding of the text as indicated in
45

the quotation from Sozomen. An interesting note of this section re-
cords that the shoes of Paul were found in the box with the revelations .
Paragraph three records instructions given to Paul to speak to the people
of the outcries of all created things against them. The sun, moon, stars ,
sea, waters, and earth each appeal to God against men. The text is in-
terspersed with answers from God to the effect that:

I know all things, and there is none that can

hide himself from his sin. And their ungodliness

do I know; but my holiness suffereth them un-

til they tum and repent. Buisif they return not

unto me, Iwill judge them.

Paragraphs seven to ten instruct the people to bless the Lord

4
lames, "Preface," p. xiii.

5 .
See above, p. 73.

46
Iames, p. 528, par. 6.

 

, .
.u w-n
‘ l
w, Jae
g .
I.‘ is

 

 

“w
no

’7‘.”

FR
_,_ J

‘.‘

| 11..

 

 

‘5

‘1,

77

and relate the visits of angels to God to report on men —— both the good
and the evil. The next section (11 to 18) tells of the Narrator's being
caught up by an angel and carried to the third heaven, to view the deaths

and judgments of the righteous and the damned.

The following section (19 to 30) details Paul's views of the ”pla—

ces of the righteous . " He passes with an angel guide through the gate
on which the names of the righteous are embossed in gold. Enoch greets

Paul at the gate and Elias salutes him. In paragraph twenty-one, Paul

learns that he may not reveal what he sees and hears in paradise: " . . .

and I heard there words which it is not lawful for a man to utter . . ."47

Then the angel shows him what he must relate and tell openly. This con-

cerns the land of promise of the beatitudes to which the souls of the
righteous are sent for a time after death. He learns that at the second
coming of Christ, the first earth will be destroyed and Christ will come
to dwell in the land of promise. This land flows with milk and honey
and the trees bear fruit in clusters of ten and twelve. To the virgins and
those who afflict themselves for the name of the Lord, God will give a
seven-fold greater reward .

Next, the Narrator is taken by means of a golden ship to the
City of Christ, the familiar one of Revelations with twelve gates and four
rivers. At the entrance to this city, Paul and his guide pass the souls

of the righteous proud who humble themselves continually waiting for the

4'7Iames, p. 536.

 

E

 

 

~¢Q ’x

.; fl

.. ‘.n

I
u.-

‘
(13

.q,1
u

.«u. ~

~.,

on.

78

day of Christ. Paul meets also the prophets , the children slain by
Herod, and the entertainers of strangers: Abraham, Isaac, jacob, Lot,
and job. In the center of the city, Paul sees David leading the singing
of all present in continuous "Alleluias . "

Sections thirty-one to forty-five record the visit of Paul to Hell.
Here he sees a river of fire in which condemned sinners are immersed
more or less fully. This river contains those who were "neither hot nor
cold" among others . The river of fire flows over the men and women who

did not trust; the devils choke priests who did not fulfill their ministries,

 

and stone iniquitous bishops; the defiled virgins have red hot chains on
their necks. Opening a well sealed with seven seals, Paul views those
who denied the humanity of Christ and His presence in the Eucharist;
this is a spot of unbearable stench. The archangel Michael comes into
Hell and Paul prays for the condemned souls; his prayer is answered by
Christ who gives the tormented souls rest on each Sabbath.

The last section of the Apocalypse (paragraphs forty-five to
fifty-one) relates Paul's second vision of Paradise. This time he is
shown the primordial garden, and is hailed by the Virgins, Abraham,
Isaac, and Iacob, the twelve patriarchs, Moses, twelve Old Testament
martyrs, Lot, Iob, Noe, Elias and Eliseus. He is then commanded to
make known his revelations to men.

At least one of the extant versions of the Apocalypse has Paul
meeting Zacharias, john the Baptist, Abel, and at the end, Adam. The ’

text is completed with a doxologY-

 

.v‘R‘

_. "nu

,...,A
.

(l

,-.

 

”‘.‘,

.a'w‘
A

ll»

an,

\5-8

)I

79

The Apocalypse of Paul as a conduit of the vision tradition takes

 

us into the time of the composition of The Pearl. It is , as we mentioned
above, the center of the vision tradition from the fourth to the fourteenth
centuries . Other conduits of the vision tradition exist in the scriptures -—
especially those surrounding the conversion of Paul, glosses written on
these passages , and in many extra—canonical works of the early Church. r]
We have examined only a select few of the latter.
It is appropriate at this point to stop and summarize some of the
conventions of this vision tradition. I. J
One point basic to all the others we have discovered is that
visions are viewed as actual manifestations of sacred realities; and,
therefore, may involve real encounters between a heavenly personage
and a live human being. At times this personage is Christ himself and
the meeting so intense that words cannot be written to describe the com-
munion which takes place. At other times, as in The Pearl, the receptor
of the vision experiences truth in the guise of another personage, the
Pearl Maiden. The extra-canonical works mentioned in'this section give
Special evidence that this form of encounter was part of the long tradition .
And, although the Visionary of The Pearl does look at the Lamb
in the heavenly jerusalem, he does not see, that is, experience the per-
son of the Lord as does Paul in his conversion vision. I have reached
this conclusion regarding the Visionary because his attention is too

easily moved from the Lamb back to the Pearl Maiden.

80

Delit be Lombe for to deuise
Wyth much meruayle in mynde went,
Best wat3 he, blypest, and moste to pryse,
bat euer I herde of speche Spent;
So worbly whyt wern wede3 hys ,
His loke3 symple, hymself so gent.
Bot a wounde ful wyde and weete con wyse
Anende hys hert, pur3 hyde torente.
Of his quyte syde his blod outsprent,
Alas , po3t I, who did pat spyt?
Ani breste for bale a3t haf forbrent
Er he berto hade had delyt.
The Lombe delyt non lyste to wane.
ba3 he were hurt and wounde hade,
In his sembelaunt wat3 neuer sene,
So wern his glente3 gloryous glade.
I loked among his meyny schene
How pay wyth lyf wern laste and lade;
pen sa3 I her my lyttel quene
pat Iwende had standen by me in sclade.
Lorde, much of mirpe wat3 pat ho made
Among her fere3 pat wat3 so quyt!
pat sy3t me gart to bank to wade
For luf—longyng in gret delyt.
(11. 1129-1152)

In addition, the Visionary plunges into the river to be with the Pearl

Maiden and not the Lamb.

Delyt me drof in y3e and ere,
My mane3mynde to maddyng malte;
Quen I se3 my frely, Iwolde be here,
Bygonde be water paz ho were walte.
I po3t bat nopyng my3t me dere
To fech me bur and take me halte,
And to start in be strem schulde non me stere,
To swymme pe remnaunt, pa3 per swalte.
(11. 1153—1160)

In other words, The Pearl has to do with a man who learns to deal with
the loss of a creature, but not with one who is seized into a direct em-
brace of the Creator of that creature. The absence of mystical rapture

does not make his experience less real, vital or important. Knowledge

 

 

.u-c

,..v.

.',.

,... .Ll

I.‘~P
\ -

.ani

-..‘o..

‘
V'UO.4

81

of the Lord gained through creatures is not less valid than that acquired
through direct experience . The latter kind is usually reserved for the
after life and, according to all the mystics, it is given only as a pure
gift in this life.

Second, visions in this early tradition are ”localized" in sacred
Space or St. Paul's third heaven of the contemplation of God. Thus the
setting of The Pearl is not just the garden, with all its many-faceted im-
plications; neither is it just the heavenly city of Ierusalem. It is the
garden where God walked with Adam because the P_e_Qi;l_Visionary walks
with a guide who leads him to the knowledge of the Lord. It is the jew-

salem which has existed in aetemum because the Iewish belief that it

 

was created with the prelapsarian garden of Genesis is part of the literary

tradition through the descriptions in Revelations and St. Paul's record

 

of his own visions which are so influential in the total tradition. It is,
of course, also Dante's garden, which is to say the earthly paradise.
M and The Divine Comedy are both inheritors of a long list of im—
plications which found their way into the vision tradition.

Third, persons who receive visions are viewed as people of
Very changed attitudes —- Peter and Paul -- as a result of vision experi-
ences. The changed attitudes result from insight, symbolized in the
light—darkness motif noticeable in many places and the blindness-sight
interpretations of Paul's experience. This change of attitude is quite
definitely present in the post-Visionary of The Pearl. He goes from a

Position of one who is irreconcilable to the loss of a child and thus

 

_,...A

i.»-

..~v" N

~ I
_...i\

 

 

82

skeptical and doubting about the very salvation of small children, to the
position of a man who has worked through his sorrow of loss on all levels
of his person, and can accept it psychologically and Spiritually —— that

is, in a totally human way. He has passed successfully through the
trauma of a shock and incomprehensible sense of loss, to one of hope.

He is changed utterly. He will not, as a result, convert the Gentiles,

or radically alter the structure of a major institution. He does, however,
pray, "Now al be to pat Prynce3 paye." (l. 1176) The beauty of individual
reconciliation need not suffer in comparison with that of a Paul.

Then again, commentaries on scriptural visions were often used
as didactic tools . While certainly not the only or most important con-
tributor of the didactic element to the medieval tradition, the vision tra-
dition did carry this aspect within it. Thus the parables of the workers
in the vineyard and the pearl of great price, added to the direct instruc-
tion of the Visionary on the salvation of young children and their place
in the Heavenly Ierusalem which together form a large part of the total
Poem, are in the full stream of a tradition whichhas didacticism as a
prominent element.

Implicitly, also, from the early Christian sources of the vision
tradition, comes a recognition that some visions are ecstatic, others oc—
cur in dreams , and still others occur without spiriting the receptor into
a state of ecstacy, that is, without the individual's really losing con-
tact with the world of earth. It seems clear that the entry of The Pearl

visionary into the garden is through ecstasy as was discussed above.

 

“tn”.

in"

 

83

So The Pearl is an ecstatic vision; however, the "wakned" (l. 1191) of
the Visionary includes the use of the word "drem.” (l. 1170) Gordon
glosses this last word with the second meaning of "vision." The Middle

48
English Dictionary lists as under the second meaning of drem, l. (a) a

 

vision experienced in sleep, a dream, and under 2. (a), a vision and

gives 1. 790 of The Pearl as an example of its use:

' T?!

p apostel hem segh in gostly drem

Finally, to turn away for a moment from the specific work in

 

question, there are several facets of the vision tradition present in this I J
early material which it is important to mention because they become
even more prominent in the mystic tradition. These are, first of all, the
early recognition of the relationship possible between a seer of visions
and a mystic. St. Augustine's comment on Perpetua and the gloss on
Peter's ecstasy are both rather explicit about this.

There is , in addition, mentioned briefly in the Pseudo-Clement
extra-canonical homily, the existence of what becomes an increasingly
important controversy among the mystics, that is, whether or not it is
possible to see God and live. The Pearl poet, I believe, avoids this
problem because of the visionary's more explicit interest in the creature
rather than the Creator. Dante's avoidance of an "awakening" scene in
his great vision may very well be connected with this facet of the tradi-

tion .

48Hans Kurath and Sherman A. Kuhn (Ann Arbor, Mich.: The Univer—
sity of Michigan Press, 1959).

cu
v
(Y)
|

.,_ ...
u " ’
v ‘,u.

u. ’8

,.. .v
.

m A‘
4. II
‘.‘ 5U

 

84

The last note that it seems important to make at this juncture

is a re-iteration of the pervasive influence of the Visio Pauli in the

 

medieval world. I make this point again because it contains in some
fashion most of the so-called apocryphal material which was so fascinat—
ing to the people and so condemned by the Church authorities. This ex-
tra-canonical account of Paul's ecstatic vision is a definite conduit of

the vision tradition .

...' runa- .? _. ‘ D __

 

L.

 

 

 

'.‘l‘lf

.- .-\

 

7-1

«Ni...

'v‘.
-

...'

te,}.

"up

-I..

III. CONTEMPLATION IN MYSTICAL SOURCES
AS A CONDUIT OF THE VISION TRADITION
We have discussed ecstasy as a para-physical state in which a

vision, a supernatural encounter between a creature and a heavenly per-
sonage, can occur. It now remains to relate contemplation, especially
as it occurs within the mystical state, to ecstatic visions .

Mystical contemplation is a name for the supreme knowing or
experiencing of the Lord by a personage gifted with an ecstatic vision.

In commenting on a particular gloss of St. Peter's vision, it was noted

that the state of ecstasy in which St. Peter found himself was called con-

templation; so the term has tradition behind it. Perhaps mystical con-
templation is best defined as ”an experimental knowledge of God."2
Now, within the writings of the mystics, the para-physical vi—
sion state is given some notice. Therefore, an historical overview of
the mystics most influential and most relevant to medieval literature
will deepen our awareness of the vision tradition in another facet of
medieval life. For, to state what must almost be a truism, the religious
or sacred writings of this period influenced and were influenced by their

counterparts in the secular sphere -- if, indeed, this kind of artificial

distinction was made by medieval man at all.

Be that as it may, it seems important to define mysticism also.

1
In regard to Acts 12:7, see above, p. 57.

2U. Aumanon, "Contemplation," NCE, 1967.

85

 

 

.I

L
”,4: a
. ‘ ‘

0...: -

 

.,
n
‘.'V'

 

86

The relationship between it and mystical contemplation will become ap-
parent immediately. "Theologia mystica est experimentalis cognito
habita de Deo per amoris univiti complexum." (Mystical theology is
knowledge of God by experience, arrived at through the embrace of uni-
fying love.)3 Corbishly's explanation of the definition merits quotation
also.

There are three points to notice: 1) the use of the
term mystical theology . . . associates the mystical
state with, while distinguishing it from, natural
theology, which enables man to arrive at some
knowledge of God by natural reason; also from dog—
matic theology, which treats of the knowledge of

God arrived at by revelation. (2) We do come to
know God through mystical theology. (3) This knowl-
edge is obtained not by' intellectual processes but

by the more direct experience implied by the term

" unifying love . "

A twentieth century writer, Evelyn Underhill, who studied the
mYStical state and the mystics themselves for many years, arrived at

the following interpretation of the mystical experience:

The Thomistic philosophy of Maritain and the psy—

chological researches of Maréchal, tend to sup-
. activity of the

port . . .[mysticism as an]. .
transcendental self; genuinely supernatural, yet
not necessarily involving any abnormal manifes-
tations, and linked by the ascending "degrees of
prayer" with the subject's "ordinary" religious

life . 5

3lean Gerson, quoted by T. Corbishly, "Mysticism," NCE, 1967.

41ibid.. p. 175.
: A_Study in the Nature and Developmen‘t

5
Evel n Underhill, Mysticism
Y 11th ed. (London: Methuen and Co. ,

iMan's Spiritual Consciousnejé.
1949)! p. X.

.”“.“. _

 

1!...‘1

87

This same author insists, however, that

though the mystic life means organic growth, its first
term must be sought in ontology [science of being or
reality] . . . For the real sanction of that life does not
inhere in the fugitive experiences or even the trans—
formed personality of the subject; but in the metaphysi-
cal object which that subject apprehends .6

And Friedrich von Hugel posits two doctrines concerning mysti-
I._
cism which add further to our understanding . He maintains that though E. 1 A

mysticism is an essential element in full human religion, it can never

be the whole content of such religion. It needs to be embodied in some

 

J. 3' _:Ir‘.‘ *_
EL .

degree of history, dogma, and institutions if it is to reach the sense—
conditioned mind. He maintains further that any antithesis between the
religions of "authority" and of "spirit" orbetween the "Church" and the
"mystic" is false. Each requires the other . . . ”It is the 'inclusive'
mystic, whose freedom and originality are fed but not hampered by the
spiritual tradition within which he appears, who accepts the incarnational
status of the human spirit and ’can find the inward in the outward as well
as the inward in the inward,‘ who shows us in their fullness and beauty

I

the life—giving possibilities of the soul transfigured in God."7
Our study, then, starts from these premises. Mysticism or
mystical contemplation is a real way to know God; it does not need to

involve any abnormal manifestations; it finds its reason for being in the

Holy One who is perceived; and it can and does exist within organized

6
Underhill, p . viii.

7
Quoted in Underhill, pp. ix-x.

 

.$'

.m"
P ‘

,a‘u. v -‘

tn v3.-
A

._,_
.e....

 

“on

‘v

 

88

religion or the Church.

Because we are pursuing this subject so as to arrive at a better
understanding of visions , per se, some further elaboration of the second
premise stated above is in order. Let us turn then to the psycho—physi-
cal accidents which often accompany the mystical experience.

Mystical phenomena in Christian Spirituality are the
internal and external manifestations that ordinarily
proceed from the authentic mystical activity of a
soul (concomitant mystical phenomena) and the
extraordinary graces, Charisms , or miracles that
sometimes accompany mystical activity but are

not essentially related to mystical operations as
such (charismatic mystical phenomena).

Concomitant mystical phenomena are called ordinary mystical phenomena

and are supernatural quoad substantiam; charismatic mystical phenomena

 

9
are called extraordinary and are supernatural quoad modum.

 

Visions are classed as charismatic phenomena and are defined
as "the perception of an object that is naturally invisible to man."10
Visions may be divided into corporeal (perception by bodily eyes), ima-
ginative (result of a phantasm in the imagination), and intellectual (re-

sult of intelligible Species impressed on the intellect). 11 These divisions,

Standard in the twentieth century, were originated by St. Augustine.

8
N. Lohkamp, "Mystical Phenomena," NCE, 1967.

9R. Garrigou-Lagrange, Christian Perfection and Contemplation, (St.
Louis, 1937), pp. 235-238.

10
N. Lohkamp, p. 173.

11
Ibid .

 

.oOv
-

.4-

 

 

89

Augustine's work is seminal to the whole vision tradition as will be dis-
cussed below.

Corporeal and imaginative visions may be caused by some
natural power or by the devil, and therefore such possibilities must be
investigated . Intellectual visions could not be caused immediately by
the devil, who has no direct access to the human intellect, but they n
could proceed from a natural or a supernatural cause.12

The recognition that all visions are not necessarily true, that '1

 

is, from God, leads us naturally into some examination of them in terms U
of psychology. This section is not intended as an anachronistic addi—
tion to the medieval authors under consideration, but rather as added
insights into the phenomena in question. The literature stands on its
merits with or without our explanation; our exposition from a twentieth
century point of view, however, may enable us to receive more con-
fidently and clearly the communication which the medieval author sent
out. Moreover, such an inquiry may prove to point out the wisdom of
intuitive psychology present in medieval literature which does not pale
in sight of our modern scientific schematized psychology.
To continue, then:

A religious phenomenon, e.g. , a vision, if it some-

times closely resembles , apart of course from the

difference of object, an ordinary psychological fact,

presents when defined and intensified, exceptional,

even abnormal considerations which tend to assimilate
it to pathological facts. But . . . this analogy is

12
N. Lohkamp, p. 173.

 

90

purely superficial, for, on a closer examination,

the strangest mystical phenomena appear to be co-
ordinated under points of view which have nothing

to do with delirium, and moreover prolong themselves
in a very consecutive manner in practices and enter-
prises of high moral value most justifiable from the
point of view of one who admits the fundamental
truths of religion. We may add that the appearance
of these strange phenomena is allied, more often than
one may think, with a perfect psychological equili-
brium, and on occasion with a most remarkable prac-
tical sense. Here, then, are facts (sudden conver-
sions, illumination, visions, ecstasies, clair-
voyance, temptations , etc.) which do not easily
enter our scientific framework . . . mystical
phenomena seem to depend on the circumstances

of their appearance on an influence which surpasses
and dominatesmour known physiological and psycho-
logical laws .

Marechal here is admitting the real limits of the science of psy-
chology. Because it is a science, it limits itself to phenomena and thus

will never give us more than a partial view of reality. " . . . it reaches

the relative aspect only of the real."14 And. most emphatically

. . . miracles and direct communication with God in
ecstasy and the supernaturality of religious acts,
cannot be taxed a priori with impossibility . . .
because God, the first cause, is not controlled

in his action by the determinism of empirical
causality which has no absolute value.

In other words, the presence of para-physical phenomena in or
around a mystical experience does not, from a psychological point of

view, validate or invalidate the true experience. Psychology works only

1
3Ioseph Marechal. S.I. , Studies in the Psychology of the Mystics,
pp. 28-29.

14
Ibid., p. 43.

15
Ibid., p. 48.

 

|
4
.av:

bu! ‘

“m A,‘
-.

why-I
.

....
'2...

It. v
.

 

‘4-
‘ u

n,‘
a

U~

91

with phenomena, not with a faith experience.

Now it is also possible to examine these para-physical pheno-
mena from the viewpoint of the mystic. What does the receiver of the
experience sense? How does this experience differ from that of ordinary
prayer?

Father Augustin Poulain explains it this way. "God is not satis—
fied merely to help us to think of him and to remind us of his presence
(as in the recollection inherent in ordinary prayer); he gives us an ex-
perimental intellectual awareness of his presence . "16

If the fundamental mystical phenomenon is then the intuition of
God as present, the remainder of the phenomena, such as physical ec-
stasy, suspension of the senses, sensible or imaginary visions, in-
terior words, levitations , miracles , clairvoyance, and so on -- are pure
accessories which may or may not accompany the fundamental state and
the immediate cause of which may be diverse.

In summary, then, our inquiry into the mystics and their writ—
ings as to how they explain or discuss visions is undertaken from the
premise that mysticism is the immediate intuition of God by the soul and
that this high contemplation implies a new element, qualitatively dis—
tinct from the normal psychological processes and from ordinary grace:

the active non-symbolic presentation of God to the soul, with its psy-

1
6T_he Graces of Interior Prayer, p. 64 .

”Marechal, p. 102.

 

0" J
«a I
.~.‘ i

 

._..‘.

92

chological correlative . 1 8

A great mass of material could be quoted to trace the continua-
tion of the vision tradition in mysticism. An attempt has been made to
treat the most important, that is, the most influential sources . In struc-
turing this study, it has become apparent that the

great periods of mystical activity tend to correspond
with the great periods of artistic, material, and in-
tellectual civilization. As a rule they come im-
mediately after, and seem to complete such periods;
those outbursts of vitality in which man makes

fresh conquests over his universe apparently producing, ..
as their last stage, a type of heroic character which . 1
extends these victories to the spiritual sphere. When

science, politics, literature and the arts -- the domina-

tion of nature and the ordering of life -— have risen to

their height and produced their greatest works , the

mystic comes to the front; snatches the torch and

carries it on. It is almost as if he were humanity's

finest flowers; the product at which each creative

period of the race had aimed.

 

The first great mystical period immediately followed the initia-
tion of the Christian era. As such, it held as inheritance the mystical
tradition of the Old Testament, especially that of the literary prophets
from Amos onward which reached a culmination in first and second Isaiah.
In these prophets, ecstasy, visions, hearing of supernatural voices , and
performance under interior compulsion of bizarre symbolic acts hold a
prominent place. And a pattern or "initiation" rite of some sort became

eStablished, as , for example, in Isaiah 6 where one may trace the pro-

18 ,
Marechal, p. 199.

19
Underhill, "Appendix," p. 453.

 

 

 

L‘Iu

ei,,
I

l

n,‘

Sq,

 

‘v

JI-

93

phet's progression from realization of revelation of an ineffable Reality
through unmeasured awe and adoration of this Reality in the created uni-
verse -- the Holy, Holy, Holy proclamation —- to the prophet‘s experi-
ence of his own nothingness in the face of the Almighty, to his cleansing
pain before this truth, to his final immediate sense of vocation and self
offering, his personal response.20

Saint Paul as the possible "first" mystic of Christianity broke
entirely new ground insofar as he is the unique link between the primi-
tive apostolic experiences of Communion with the Risen Iesus and the
still continued Christocentric mysticism of the Church. His years in

Arabia, evidently a period of self-conquest from the evidence in Romans

 

were accompanied by the development of visionary and ecstatic tenden—
cies which the circumstances of his conversion prove St. Paul to have
possessed.

The other major figure in the initial period to have developed
like tendencies is , of course, the author of the Book of Revelation. The
constant influence of this work goes without mentioning. The vision in
The Pearl of the heavenly Jerusalem is right out of Revelation.

The second stream of mysticism, evolved around Clement of
Alexandria (c. 150-220) and his pupil Origen (c. 183—253). In the course
of his writings on the ascent of the soul to God, Origen speaks of what

he calls the "gift of visions." Quasten21 remarks on the clarity of this

20 '
Underhill, p. 31.

21
Iohannes Quasten, Patrology, II, 98.

 

 

”NP"
.. y '

'4”

.1. A
. \
uv- h

 

94

statement and concludes that Origen realized purpose and value of the
gift of visions from his own experience. To Origen, such visions con-

sist of "illuminations in prayer and reading of the Scripture, which re-

22

veal divine mysteries . " Moreover, the more these spiritual favors in—

crease, the higher the spirit climbs, until it reaches Mount Tabor.

Verum non aequaliter omnes qui vident illuminatur
a Christo, sed singuli secundum eam mensuram
illuminantur, qua vim luminis recipere valent. Et
sicut non aequaliter oculi corporis nostri illuminan-
tur a sole, sed quanto quis in loca altiora con—
scenderit, et ortun ejus editioris speculae intuitione
fuerit contemplatus, tanto amplius et splendoris ejus
vim percipiet et caloris: ita etiam mens nostra quan~
to altius et excelsius appropinquaverit Christo, ac
se viciniorem splendori lucis ejus objecerit, tanto
magnificentius et clarius ejus lumine radiabitur . . .
Si vero etiam talis quis fuerit, ut possit et in montem
ascendere cum eo sicut Petrus , et Jacobus , et
Joannes, iste non solum Christi lumine, sed etiam
Patris ipsius illuminabitur voce.

(249,, XII, 131-132)

Yet not all who have sight are illuminated by Christ
in equal measure; each has illumination in proportion
as he has capacity to receive the power of the light.
The eyes of our body do not receive the light of the
sun in equal measure, but the higher the levels to
which one climbs, the more lofty the view point from
which one watches the vista of the sunrise, the larger
is one's sense of the power of the sun's light and
heat. So it is also with our spirit; the higher and the
further it goes in its approach to Christ, the more
nearly it exposes itself to the glory of His light, the
more finely and splendidly is it illuminated by His
radiance . . . And if a man be even so advanced as
to be able to go up with Him to the mount, as Peter,
James and John, He shall have the illumination not
only of the light of Christ but even of the very Father's
voice.

(Gen. Hom., l, 7 SPCK)

22Johannes Quasten, Patrolggy, II, 98.

 

 

95

The purpose of such visions is to fortify the soul
against future afflictions [ut anima post haec pati
possint acerbitam tribulationem et tentationum] ,
(Cant. 2, 171) . They are the oases in the desert of
suffering and temptation. Origen does not fail to
caution against paying too much attention to such
experiences of sweetness . Even they can be used
by the devil: [cavendum est et solicite agendum,

ut scienter discernas visionum genus], (Num. hom. ,
27, 11). ‘7

 

Some mention must be made here of the great pagan philosopher E ‘I
Plotinus (A.D. 205-c. 207) . Although his mysticism owes nothing direct-

ly to the Christian religion, which is never mentioned in his works , his

 

.iH 3"" for"

intellectual constructions are made the vehicle of mystical experience.
His disciple Prophyry has left it on record that on four occasions he saw
his master rapt to ecstatic union with "the One. " For Neoplatonism
taught the existence of an Absolute God, the "Unconditioned One" who
might be known in ecstasy and contemplation.24

Moreover, Augustine borrowed heavily from Plotinus; the
Christian who wrote under the pseudonym of Dionysius the Areopagite
"attempted to Christianize Neoplatonism"; and it is not coincidental that
Neoplatonism and Christianity in the third century came together and in-
fluenced each other because Origen and Plotinus were products of the

same Alexandrian school.25 In fact, Katsaros and Kaplan maintain that

2
3Quasten, II, 98.

2
4Underhill, "Appendix, " pp. 455-456. See also Marechal, op. cit.,
for a more detailed interpretation of Plotinus, p. 178; and Knowles, The

En lish M stical Tradition, p. 22.

25Thomas Katsaros and Nathaniel Kaplan, The Western Mystical 1‘22“

.t-n

‘.Veu‘

:tsr

road

 

a.

._—l_4'

96

"Plotinus' uniqueness lies in the fact that he went beyond philosophy and

developed a full-fledged, pure mysticism which became the basis for all

future mystical thought in the Western World. "26

A rather pointed example of the influence of Plotinus can be
seen in the following quotation in which Augustine is describing the

desirability of the beatific vision:

For that vision of God is a beauty of a vision so
great, and is so infinitely desirable that Plotinus
does not hesitate to say that he who enjoys all
other blessings in abundance, and has not this

is supremely miserable. 27
City of (Log, Bk. X, Sect. 7

The religious experiences of the early monks of the desert,

eSpecially St. Anthony, constitute what may be called the third period

of mysticism. It is, however, Augustine, the great commentator on St.

Anthony, who inaugurates and brings to fruition the major mystical writ-

ings of the early Church.

Augustine was, first of all, a natural mystic who left us in the

W one of the most marvellous records in history of the trans-

formation of a soul by the grace of God. In addition, he brought Greek

thought and religious feeling into the m

The major Sources for Augustine's thoughts on mysticism are, according

¥

dition (College and University Press: New Haven. Connecticut. 1969) .

1.157-167.

26
Ibid., p. 148.

 

27Quoted on p. 160 of Katsaros and Kaplan.

ain stream of Christian mysticism.

 

(PS-.13 -
‘~—..

in. M
‘_,‘.o
u
n
n

_—l

 

97

to Butler:

Confessions, VII, 16, 23; DC, 23-25; X, 65;

 

Enarratio in Psalmum xli (heb. xlii);
de Quantitate Animae, 74, 75, 76;
de Genesi ad litteram4 XII;

Ep. cxlvii de Videndo Deo;

c. Faustum, XXII, 52-58;

de Civitate Dei, SD(, 1, 2, 19;

. ‘j-‘:‘l--._ ‘.7 T “
‘-
"'

Sermons, ciii., civ. j

Augustine's definition of contemplation is directed primarily at

an attempt to describe the lot of the blessed in heaven.
Serenum atque rectum aspectum in id, quod videndum
est, dirigere. 29
(de Quanti Anim. , 75)

It is the directing a serene and straight look on
the object to be looked at.3

However, he does not limit the beginnings of contemplation, or glimpses
or intuitions of divine things , to the next life. Thus he says:
. . .in choata vero contemplatio maneat donec

venio, perficienda cum venero.
P.L., W, 1974.

Contemplation is only begun in this life, to be

28Butler, p. 20 .

29Quoted in Butler, p. 26, footnote 1.

30Butler's translation, p. 26.

 

"-
up

98

perfected in the next. 31

(Tract. in loan. , cxxiv, 5)

 

Augustine expressed the same idea in his often repeated phrase:
Quia fecisti nos ad te, et inquietum est cor nostrum,
donec requiescat in te.
Conf. I, i, in P.L., XXXII, 661

Thou has created us for Thyself, and our heart is
restless until it rests in Thee.

"The twelfth book of the incomplete de Genesi ad litteram.
which is primarily concerned with St. Paul's vision when he was rapt to
the third heaven, is also a basis for a discussion of visions in general
in terms of principles being laid governing also ordinary perception and
cognition . " 32

Some rather detailed attention will be paid to this vision theory
of Augustine because literally nothing new has been added to the theory
since. Scores of mystics and non—mystics have quoted it since the

fourth century; Thomas Aquinas quotes it word for word in presenting it as

basic in the Summa and elsewhere; and the latest edition of the New

 

Catholic Encyclopedia accepts it as standard without even mentioning
Augustine by name. More to our point, Augustine's ideas were well
known to Gregory and Bernard of Clarivaux as well as to lesser lights in
the centuries immediately preceding W. And, strikingly, there

is some evidence that Boethius' extremely influential Consolations of

31Butler's translation, p. 27.

32Butler, p. 36.

 

E“! If“ . . )

99

Philosophy is constructed along the lines of Augustine's theory.33

Augustine, in the twelfth book of de Genesi ad litteram, dis—
tinguishes three kinds of perception, or, more exactly to use the author's
words, objects perceived or visions. He calls them corporeal, Spiritual
or imaginagy , and intellectual.

Corporeal visions are the perception of actual physical things; “1
Spiritual (imaginagy) visions are the perception of images in the memory I ~--
or imagination; intellectual visions are the perception of the objects of

the pure intellect.34 _~; 7 E
U

 

Augustine exemplifies his three kinds of perception with the
following illustration. If a person reads the Commandment, "Thou shalt
love thy neighbor as thyself ," the corporeal perception is of the letters
themselves; the spiritual (imaginary) is the image of the absent neighbor;
and the abstract idea of "love" constitutes the intellectual vision.35

In another place, Augustine distinguishes between wisdom and

science: "To wisdom pertains the intellectual cognition of things eter—

33
Charlotte C. Morse of Yale University in a paper delivered May 1,
1973, at the Eighth ggonferenpe 9n Medieval Studies, Western Michigan

University, Kalamazoo, Michigan, suggested that the various books of
The Consplatipns pf Philosophy represented Augustine's corporeal, ima—
ginative, and intellectual visions in application. Even: if Augustine‘s
work was not a conscious source for Boethius , it may help explain why
the W became so potent a model for the development of
medieval vision and dream vision literature. Seeming to express St.
AmJustine's theory as well as its own explicit message, it enjoyed re-
doubled authority and naturally exercised wide influence.

34de Gen. ad litt., XII, 6—9, 15-20, in Butler, p.36.

3
5de Gen. ad litt., X11, 6, 15;)(1, 22. in Butler. p. 36.

(I)
r-'\

T0

3.. ‘
>9. "c PC
a .Jh‘v V

.
.. In l‘
‘u :7: p ‘
...vUV"

"that:

w
I !"
‘."J
Jr“ -‘ ' ‘

we no
“(Jr ~‘ V

‘P ‘A
:- Ff

'Ionu ‘

 

100

nal: to science the rational cognition of things temporal."36 Augustine
groups corporeal and spiritual (imaginary) visions as the objects of
science because they both are visions of changeable things . He calls
intellectual visions wisdom because they are visions of eternal things .
Moreover, in true intellectual visions , the visionary is not liable to
error because what he intellectually sees is true.

Augustine names the objects of intellectual visions as the mind

itself; every good virtue of the soul —- charity, joy, peace, longanimity --

38
by which it draws near to God; and finally, God Himself.
The following is a more detailed account of the objects of in-
tellectual visions .

Sic etiam in illo genere intellectualium visorum alis
sunt quae in ipsa anima videntur, velut virtutes . . .
ipsae intellectualiter videntur . . . Aliud autem est
ipsum lumen, quo inlustratur anima, ut omnia vel in
se vel in illo vera citer intellecta conspiciat. Nam
illus iam ipse Deus est, haec autem creatur a, quam—
vis rationalis et intellectualis ad eius imaginem fac-
ta, quae cum conatur lumen illud intueri palpitat in—
firmitate et minus valet. Inde est tamen quidquid in-
tellegit sicut valet. Cum ergo illuc rapitur et a car-
nalibus subtracta sensibus illi expressius visioni
praesentatur, non spatiis localibus, sed modo quo-
dam suo, etiam supra se videt, quo adiuta videt quid-
quid etiam in se intellegendo videt.

(de Gen. ad litt., XII, 31, 59)

35de Trin., XII, 25, in Butler. pp. 36—37.
37de Gen. ad litt., x11, 25, 52, in Butler. p. 37.

3
8de Gen. ad litt. , XII, 24—50 in Butler, p. 37.

39Quoted in Butler, p. 55, footnote 1.

39

 

'.- .

 

101

Among the intellectual objects of vision, some are seen
in the soul itself, as the virtues: . . . these are in-
tellectually seen. Distinct, however [from things in-
tellectually seen] ,- is that Light Itself, whereby the
soul is so enlightened that it beholds, whether in
itself or in that Light, all things truly the object of

the intellect. For that Light is God Himself: but the
soul, although rational and intellectual, is a creature
made after His image, which when it endeavors to fix
its gaze on that Light, quivers through weakness and

is not able. Yet still thence [i.e. , from the Light] is
whatever it intellectually perceives as it is able. When
it is borne away thither, and withdrawn from the bodily
senses [i.e. , in ecstasy], it is more expressly pre-
sented to that vision, not in local space but in some
way of its own, even above itself it sees That by help
of which it sees whatever it intellectually sees even

in itself.40

"This passage seems to show that in an ecstasy of the intel—
lectual order, the soul not only sees 'in' the divine Light, but in some
ways sees that divine Light which is God Himself."41

Augustine does not use the phrase " union with God" to describe
what he calls intellectual vision. However, any number of quotations
from his works describe what later msytics call Union.

Thus when "in a flash of thought he touched the
Eternal Wisdom, " he declares:

"Were this prolonged, and the vision ravish and ab-
sorb and wrap up its beholder in inward joys, so
that life might be forever like that one moment of
understanding; were not this the entry into the

joy of Heaven? " 42
(Conf. , IX 25)

40Butler's translation, pp. 54-55.

41Butler, p. 55 .

42Ibid., p. 46.

 

irq.\ ‘

 

 

. .in:

“,1...

....

102

Now, Augustine also discusses what takes place in ecstatic
vision, what takes place in mind and soul during it, based on this dis-
tinction of three kinds of perception or vision.

Frequently in ecstasy it is a case of the second kind
of vision, the "spiritual" (imagery) as in St. Peter's
vision, when he saw the Sheet let down from heaven,
with four~footed beasts and creeping things; but some-
times it is a case of the third, or intellectual, the
soul being raised to the realm of things purely intel-
lectual (intellegibilia) .4

The twofold kind of vision in ecstasy is brought out also in the

following:

Ecstasy is an alienation of the mind from the senses
of the body, that the spirit of a man taken up by the
divine Spirit may be free to attend to the receiving and
beholding images: as to Peter was shown the sheet
let down from heaven. . . (Or) the mind may be so
affected that it comprehends not images of things, but
beholds the things themselves as wisdom and justice
are intellectually seen, and every unchangeable and
divine species (i.e. , "idea" in the divine mind) --
ita mens afficitur ut non rerum imagines coniecturali
examinatione intelliqatL sed res ipsas intueaturJ sicut
intelligitur sapientia et iustitia onmique incommutabilis
et divina species .

(De diversis Quaest. ad Simplicianum, ii Quaest. i. U44
Porro autem si quemadmodum raptus est a sensibus cor-
poris, ut esset in istis similitudinibus corporum, quae
spiritu videntur, ita et ab ipsis rapiatur, ut in illam
quasi regionem intellectualium vel intellegibilium sub—
vehatur, ubi sine ulla corporis similitudine perspicua
veritas cernitur, nullis opinionum falsarum nebulis
offuscatur, ibi virtutes animae non sunt operosae ac
laboriosae . . . Una ibi et tota virtus est amare quod
videas et summa felicitas habere quod amas. Ibi enim
beata vita in fonte suo bibitur, unde aspergitur aliquid

3
Commentary by Butler, p. 52 .

Butler, p. 52, footnote 1.

 

103

huic humanae vitae . . . Ibi videtur claritas domini
non per visionem significantem sive corporalem sive
spiritalem, sed per speciem non per aenigmata, quan-
tum eam capere humana mens potest, secundum ad-
sumentis Dei gratiam, ut 03 ad os loquatur Deus ei
quem dignum tali conloquio fecerit, non os corporis ,
sed mentis , sicut intelligendum arbitror, quod de
Moyse scriptum est.

(de Gen. adylitt. , XII, 26, 54; ed chha, "Corpus

Viennense")45

If, as one is rapt from the senses of the body, so as
to be among those images of bodies whichare seen

by the spirit (imagination); in the same way may one
be rapt from them also, so as to be lifted up into that
region of intellectual or intelligible things, where
without any image of body the perspicuous truth is
perceived and is obscured by no mists of false opinions;
there the virtues of the soul have no scope for their
operations or labours: for neither is there lust to be
restrained by temperance, nor adversities to be borne
by fortitude, nor iniquity to be punished by justice,
nor evils to be avoided by prudence. There the sole
and all—embracing virtue is to love what you see,

and the supreme happiness to possess what you love.
For there the blessed life is drunk at the fountain head,
whence there drop some Sprinklings on this human life,
that amid the trialsof this world one may live with tem-
perance, fortitude, justice, and prudence. Since it is
for the sake of attaining unto that where will be an un-
troubled quiet, and an ineffable vision of truth, that
the labour is undertaken of restraining oneself from
pleasure, and enduring adversities, and helping the
needy, and resisting deceivers . There is seen the
brightness of the Lord, not by any symbolic vision,
whether corporal or Spiritual (imaginary): but by "Spe—
cies , " not by enigmas (aenigmata) , in so far as the
human mind can grasp it, according to the grace of
God who takes hold of it, that God may speak mouth

to mouth to him whom He hath made worthy of such
colloquy: not the mouth of the body, but of the mind.
[just as , I think what was written about Moses must be
understood . ]4 6

 

45
Quoted in Butler, p. 53, footnote 1.

6 I
Butler 5 translation. p. 53.

.«vr~;r" C

vAdv-"M

3.... ..l-.

u- MD."
’ ‘;

.A. Jv'vv‘
«II

' ‘I

.tuvt

 

..
.1 53'9-

vvh.-- av
.

‘.-
h
'u‘

_—l—-“

104

The final question which must be explored in regard to visions
concerns Augustine's discussion of whether a man may see God and live.
Augustine does see this as possible as can be verified by reference to
the quotation from Liber de Videndo Deo (Ep. cxlvii) , cited above on
p. 23. However, seeing God is not the usual end of contemplation; it
is not obtained in all ecstasies; it is not a constant facet of the mystic {‘1
experience as the following verify.
There is another life which is immortal, in whichthere
are no ills . There we shall see face to face what here .
is seen in enigma, even when great progress has been E

made in contemplating truth. I"
(Tract. in Joan. , CXXIV, 5)

 

In this life contemplation is rather in faith, and with
a very few through a mirror in enigma, and, in part,
in some vision of unchangeable Truth.

(de Cons. Evang., I, 5

)47

As F.H. McDudden shows in his Gregory the Great,‘18 "his
(GFGQOI'Y'S) theology is little more than a popularization of that of Augus—
tine, " which he presented in the form that remained current throughout
the early Middle Ages, so that the staple theology of those ages was in
the main that of St. Augustine as diluted by St. Gregory.

Gregory was the recognized master of mysticism from his day
(540-604 A.D.) through the five centuries of the early Middle Ages .

Moreover, "along with St. Augustine and pseudo-Dionysius, he was St.

Thomas' principal authority over the range of subjects comprised under

47Butler, p. 61,

48 ‘
McDudden, II, 293, 468, in Butler, p. 25.

.1;

‘.‘pop

\y‘l-v

«v.

a...

:4

 

105

49
contemplation and contemplative life."
Gregory's teachings on mysticism are not in separate texts but
are part of the following works:

Morals on Job: v. 52-66; vi. 55—61; vii. 40, 50; x, 31;
svii. 88-90; xxiii. 37—43; xxiv. ll, 12; xxi. 99-102.

Homilies on Ezechiel: 1. iii. 9-14; V. 12, 13:11. 1.
16—18; ii. 7-15; v. 8—20.

 

Pastoral Rule: 1. 5, 6, 7; 11. 5,7.

 

One of his descriptions of contemplation follows:

Prius a mentis acie exurente trisitia interposita malorum
caligo detergitur, et tunc resplendente raptim coruscatione
incircumscripti luminis illustratur. Quo utcunque con-
specto, in gaudio cuiusdam securitatis absorbetur, et
quasi post defectum vitae praesentis ultra se rapta, in
quadam novitate aliquo modo recreatur. Ibi mens ex
immenso fonte infusione superni roris aspergitur; ibi
non se sufficere ad id quod rapta est contemplatur, et
veritatem sentiendo videt quia quanta est ipsa veritas
non videt. 50

(Mor. xxiv. 11)

The intervening mist of evils is first washed away from
the eye of the mind by burning sorrow; and then it is
illumined by the bright coruscations of the unencompassed
Light flashing upon it. When this is in any way seen,
the mind is absorbed in a sort of rapturous security; and
carried beyond itself, as though the present life had
ceased to be, it is in a way remade in a certain new—
ness [it is refreshed in a manner by a kind of new being:
Oxf. Lib.] There the mind is besprinkled with the infu-
sion of heavenly dew from an inexhaustible fountain;
there it discerns that it is not sufficient for that to which
it has been carried, and from feeling the Truth),1 it sees
that it does not see how great Truth itself is.

49
Butler, p. 65

50
Quoted in Butler, p. 74, footnote 2.

51
Butler's translation, p. 74.

 

106

As to the physical side of contemplation and ecstasy, the ideas
of a great practical mystic such as Gregory are a valuable contribution
to the psychology of religious experience.

St. Gregory habitually uses the word "rapt" in speaking of the
soul in contemplation.52 Key quotations from his writings illustrating
this point were mentioned on p. 28 .

As we noted above, Gregory describes Benedict's vision in
such a way as to represent him as retaining full possession of his mind
and external senses, and as in no way carried away by ecstasy -- but it
is a vision. This denial of ecstasy confirms that view expressed, that
all psycho-physical phenomena were outside of Gregory's horizon.

Finally, Gregory, contrary to Augustine, taught that God cannot
be seen or known as He is by mortal man in this life. This view is in
accordance with ordinary theology in the West. Therefore, although for
Augustine it is an ecstasy that is the highest and most spiritual experi-
ence that can fall to the lot of man, as St. Paul's , "wherein he knew not
whether he was in the body for out of the body"; for Gregory it is no more
than the spiritual commonplace of dying to the lust and pleasures of this
world.53 This watering down of Augustine's conceptions would open
wide the gate to the Vision of God to almost all comers in the spiritual

life. It also seems that it might also provide a philosophical basis for

52For :apere, rapi, see above, p. 28.

53

 

Butler, ppo 91‘92.

 

 

OR
hu‘
av

(A. A‘
y, ‘ a

\
'i-n'ud

. V
HA‘:'fl
0,4.u

‘I

nu

’4'.

(7)

 

107

the use of visions in a literary tradition -- if such a basis were ever
desired.

As we noted in the first chapter, there was a marked revival of
mystical religion in the twelfth century under the leadership of Hildegard,
Richard of St. Victor and, especially, St. Bernard. An example of Hilde-
gard's visions is the following:

They are pictures . . . seen within the mind "neither
in dream, sleep, nor any frenzy, " involving no hal-
lucination and never interfering with her outward
sight. "I did not see these things with the bodily eyes
or hear them with outward ears , but as I behold them
according to God's will, openly and fully awake, con-
sidering them in the full light of the mind, eyes and
ears of the inner man. How is this? It is hard for
carnal man to understand . . . When fully penetrated
by my light I said many things strange to those who
heard them. "54
(Scivias)
Richard's three stages of mystical apprehension have already

been outlined . 5 5

An important additional item in Richard's work is his
insistence that true contemplation is given or infused.

St. Bernard, founder of Clairvaux, is, of course, the dominant
figure in twelfth century religious life. He says that he who loves indeed
will desire, beyond vision, the penetration of God into the very ground
of his heart; and the earnest of this experience is to be its practical

effect. His doctrine is found in the eighty-six sermons on the Canticle

iCanticles .

54
Quoted in Underhill, pp. 77—78.

55
See above, pp. 33-34.

 

 

no

..n

g..

on.

~ a

v\-

 

 

108

Bernard distinguishes two kinds of contemplation, that of the
intellect and that of the heart.

Cum enim duo sint beatae contemplationis excessus,

in intellectu unus, et alter in affectu; unus in lumine,

alter in fervore; unus in agnitione, alter in devotione . . .
E13114, CLXXXIII, 1018.

There are two kinds of transport (excessus) in holy con-
templation: the one in the intellect, the other in the
heart (affectus); the one in light, the other in fervour;
the one in discernment, the other in devotion.

(Cant. , xlix, 4)

"St. Bernard dwells chiefly on the 'contemplation of the heart'
and it is in this that he principally places the mystic experience, or,
as it is otherwise called, the state of passive union."57

St. Bernard likens contemplation to the sleep of the soul in the

arms of God; but it is a deep sleep, alive and watchful, which enlightens

the inward senses [magis istius —- modo vitalis vigilque supor sensum

 

in_teriorem illuminat] -— a sleep which dulls not the senses but ravishes
them- (mu liii, 2 , 3)58 Here we are taught that Bernard's contempla-
tion is no "quietism" although images and sense perceptions are eliminated
and the faculties of the mind reduced to silence; the soul itself is full of
light and Operating with an intense activity. And it is in Bernard that

the imagery of "spiritual marriage" as a metaphor for the relationship be—

6
Butler's translation, p. 102.
57Butler, p. 102.

58Revera enim dormitio est, quae tamen sensum non sopiat, sed ab-
ducat. P.L., CLXXXIII, 911.

 

 

l'

109

tween God and the soul in the highest kinds of mystical contemplation
is found fully developed.

Bernard agrees with Gregory, in opposition to Augustine, that
God cannot be seen in his essence by a man in this life.

Et nunc quidem apparet quibus vult; sed sicuti vult,
non sicut est. Non sapiens, non sanctus, non pro—
pheta videre illum, sicuti est, potest, aut potuit
in corpore hoc mortali.

ILL. CLXXXIII, 911.

God now appears as He wishes, not as He is. No

wise man, no saint, no prophet, is able to see Him

as He is, nor has been able to in this mortal body.
(c_:_ap_t_., xxxi, 2)59

As regards psycho—physical concomitants, there is no evidence
that the phenomenon depicted is other than mental. The words he uses
are the familiar excessus which translates ekstasis and the verb mente
excedire. Finally, Bernard characterizes the knowledge of God in con-
templation as follows:

Dormiens in contemplatione Deum somniat; per speculum
suquidem et in aenigmate, non autem facie ad faciem
interim intuetur. Tamen sic non tam spectati, quam
conjectati, idque raptim et quasi sub quodam coruscamine
scintillulae transeuntis, tenuiter vix attacti ardescit
amore . . .

ILL.. CLXXXIII, 862 .

The soul slumbering in contemplation dreams God; for
through a mirror and in an enigma, and not face to face,
does it behold Him; and it warms with the love of some-
thing conjectured rather than seen, momentarily, as if
in the flash of a psssing spark, and touched scantily

59Butler, p. 119.

 

... rchi"

mix.»

I r

“5'

"‘vt

A"!

(I)

 

r4

110

and barely . . .

(Cant., xviii, 6)60

In limiting my treatment of visions within the mystic tradition to
the recognized masters, SS. Augustine, Gregory, and Bernard, Irecog-
nize that I am speaking only of a main stream of mysticism which is in
Butler's terms "pre—Dionysian, pre-scholastic, and non-philosophical"
in regard to Bernard and Gregory; Augustine, of course, is neo-Platonic. F]
It is also a stream which is quite different in tone from a type which a—

bounds in revelations and visions and which appeared with St. Gertrude

 

and the two MeChtildes in the century after St. Bernard. "They are the
recipients of communications and messages , seers of pictorial panoramic
visions . And from that time forth these elements have tended to enter
more and more into the experiences of Catholic mystics, and have almost
come to be identified with mysticism itself."61

Examples of this newer stream would give further evidence that
the poet of The Pearl came from an environment fed by a tradition very
aware of visions . They would not, however, as far as I can ascertain at
this point, add anything of substance to the vision tradition formed from
scriptural and mystical sources . I mean that additional examples would
be no more than additional -- quantitative and not qualitative.

So, arbitrary as the decision may be, I have decided to make

the applications possible to The Pearl from this highly selective set of

60
Butler's translation, p. 120.

61
Butler, p. 126.

,nm‘h L:
1" .N er:
.¢»'l
. .p-‘(fllz
";'V.‘EII5VI
1
pnI-n‘
‘.‘ v‘ :
S-Uv‘v‘v'

1., I «on 'n
11.0.1 U

V
"12:“ ‘7
"web J

1

out. *6

.- A”
1‘1 r
“amt

 

'.‘-‘1'

.
OK 6,

.. ‘\

 

111

examples . One more comment may add some weight to this decision. It
is obvious that the tone of the great fourteenth century vision poems ,
especially The Pearl and the Divine Comedy, is much closer to an Augus—
tinian classicism than a Margery Kemp romanticism, to coin two very
broad generalizations .

The most obvious kind of conclusion to draw from this section is
to say that the vision(s) of the narrator of The Pearl are probably corporeal
and imaginative rather than intellectual. The latter is eliminated on the
grounds that the visionary never did see God. Therefore, I posit the
following very tentative hypothesis.

The general movement of the visionary in The Pearl may be seen
to follow the corporeal type of vision, through the imaginative, and ap-
proach the intellectual type.

In fit 11, for example, the narrator's vision is entirely corporeal,
physical in St. Augustine's terms. In fit 111, he only starts to expand
from the mere corporeal as he begins to imagine what is beyond his im—
mediate surroundings .

Forpy I bo3t pat Paradyse
Wat3 per ouer gayn po bonke3 brade. (11. 137-138)

It is only as he begins to desire to see beyond the river that he sees the
Pearl Maiden.

More meruayle con my dom adaunt:

I se3 bygonde pat myry more

A crystal clyffe ful relusaunt;

Mony ryal ray con fro hit rere.

At be fote perof per sete a faunt,

A mayden of menske, ful debonere; (11. 157-162)

 

'.'.“ISI

.
._-;r“ C.
I

”A 9"

.ank'”

(“Jud--

(t.

"C.

ind

*\)
(I)

 

112

At this point, as at the beginning of the vision as such, he takes a back-
ward step as he contemplates this imaginative vision - once again in
corporeal terms (11. 177-240). Fits V-XV (11. 241-912) comprise the de-
bate section of the poem. Then, having reconciled himself to much that
the Pearl Maiden would teach him, the narrator again moves beyond the
present, tangible reality and seeks to know if there is more beyond.

Haf 3e no wone3 in castel—walle,

Ne maner per 3e may mete and won?

pou telle3 me of Jerusalem be ryche ryalle,

per Dauid dere wat3 dy3t on trone,

Bot by pyse holte3 hit con not hone,

Bot in Judee hit is, pat noble note. (11. 917-922)
And in line 973 , the Pearl Maiden leads him to where he can see more.
"If I pis mote pe schal vnhyde, . . ." Perhaps we can say to where his
imaginative vision could become intellectual. It is highly significant
that line 985 reads: "As John be apostel hit sy3 wyth sy3t." The nar-
rator and the author are telling us that this indeed is a vision like to
St. John's .

In the initial appearance of the city, the narrator again reverts
to what may be called his third corporeal vision as he explains in detail
the physical aspects of the city (11. 989-1092). Then, in another move-
ment into what may be called another imaginative vision, he sights his
Pearl Maiden again and watches the activity of the Blessed. It is here

that we see the closest approach to an intellectual vision as the narrator

describes the worship of the Lamb and the delight and wonder within him-

self.

 

 

.r:f ”'1
. *1, .AV

{.4 o!» c

J": '.‘"-

Fi'

 

113

Delit be Lombe for to deuise
Wyth much meruayle in mynde went.

Best wat3 he, blypest, and moste to pryse,
pat euerl herde of speche spent;

So worbly whyt wern wede hys ,
His loke3 symple, hymsel so gent. (11. 1154-56)

Then, however, when he makes the movement to join the throng, it is

because

My mane3 mynde to maddyng malte; 'F
Quen I se3 my frely, IWolde be pere. (11. 1154-56) I;

And the vision is over.

In suggesting that Augustine's types of visions are present in
The Pearl, 1 am aware that Augustine's description oftcorporeal and imagina- J
tive visions are as much a psychological interpretation of how man comes
to know something as they are an explanation of visions as such. I still
find it valid to posit Augustine's vision theory as a possible explanation
for what is happening within The Pearl.

Finally, some individual points will be made here that are rele-
vant to the vision tradition as described in this chapter.

The second stanza of the poem sets a reflective mood which
might be interpreted as a kind of meditative reflection which so many of
the great mystics have insisted on as a preparation for any kind of uni-
tive or ecstatic experience.

Also, line 63,

My goste is gon in Gode3 grace

lines 193 —94 ,

Perle py3te of ryal prys
pere mo3t mon by grace haf sene,

.IILAK“ .
{fluent ‘

 

,._,, i

lluu

\y u.
lwil‘hl

114

lines 965-968 ,

pat schene sayde: bat God wyl schylde;
bou may not enter wythinne hys tor,

Bot of be Lombe I haue be aquylde

For a sy3t perof bur3 gret fauor

contain the traditional belief that all true mystic experience is a pure

gift of God and not something a man can work for.

Lines 99-100 and 133-136 certainly seem an echo of Paul: [‘3

be derbe perof for to deuyse
Nis no wy3 worpe pat tonge bere3 .

More of wele wat3 in bat wyse ,
pen I cowpe telle pa3 I torn hade, [L j
For vrbely herte my3t not suffyse

To be tenb dole of 130 gladne3 glade;

 

Finally the name Ierusalem, in line 952 , is interpreted as mean-

ing "a vision of peace, "62 and the post-ecstatic visionary describes his

own experience quite bluntly as a true vision.

In his veray avysyoun!
(1. 1184)

62Gordon, p. 77, n. 950—952.

 

(1‘

an ...

v‘npn ‘

 

‘-
M:
‘5 U
.
A.

V:
v.15!

(D

7

If.

f) .

IV. MYSTICAL MARRIAGE AS AN EXPRESSION OF UNITIVE ENCOUNTER
WITH GOD AS IT OCCURS IN SCRIPTURAL, EARLY CHRISTIAN
AND MYSTICAL SOURCES IN THE VISION TRADITION
The fourth element present in The Pearl which, together with
ecstasy, vision and mystical contemplation, forms the vision tradition
is the concept of spiritual or mystical marriage. This idea is not present
in The Pearl in any experiential way, that is, the reader does not watch r "3

the Visionary reach closer and closer union which culminates in direct

union with the Lord, or mystical marriage. Rather mystical marriage is

 

if! .— : ~._.

the metaphor which illustrates the state of the Pearl Maiden in union

with the Lord in the Heavenly Ierusalem. Ultimately, the source for this
imagery is in Revelation 21 and 22, and the raiment of the Pearl Maiden
as a bride in Revelation 19. However, the richness and full implications
of what the Pearl Maiden has become and of what, at least by implication,
the Visionary could experience is found in the full tradition of the use of
the analogy, that is, from the faint stirrings in Hosea through the major

Canticle of Canticles or Song of Songs. The symbolism is part of the

 

mystical tradition in many centuries since Saint Bernard explored the im-
plications and applications of the Old Testament epithalamium to the in-
dividual soul's relationship with God.

We shall discuss this tradition and follow it with some important
passages from Bernard which illustrate the tradition as the Pearl poet
probably knew it. Finally we shall try to elucidate some of the key pas-

Sages of The Pearl itself using the implications of the tradition.

115

 

 

- 1
94. A W
"'9: UL
u, I.“ 5
.1. v L

rapta:
‘- vi!

\

‘ a
"mg
a.“ I.

' i
'10-
”Maui

‘.hp
4. _r

ul\‘l ‘.‘

n
5‘

‘i'vu

116

The marriage metaphor to express the relationship between God
and his people Israel is used in the Old Testament. The prophecy of
Hosea, or Osee, is the earliest biblical instance of this motif. "The
interpretation of the opening chapters [of Hosea] is much disputed, but
the following seems most probable: Hosea has married a wife whom he
loves but who deserts him; his love remains, however, and, having put
her to the test, he takes her back. The prophet's sad experience be-
comes a metaphor for Yahweh's dealings with his people. Chapter two
draws the moral and at the same time provides the key to the whole book.
Israel, the bride of God, has become a faithless harlot, has aroused the
anger and jealousy of her divine husband. God's love remains; he will

punish her, but only to bring her back and restore her to the joys of their

first love . "1

An excerpt from chapter two will confirm the ease and natural-

ness with which the metaphor developed.

Quia dixit: Vadam post amatore meos, qui dant panes
mihi, et aquas meas, lanam meam, et linum meum,
oleum meum, et potum meum.

Propter hoc ecce ego sepiam viam tuam spinis, et sepiam
eam maceria, et semitas suas non inveniet.

Et sequetur amatore suos, et non apprehendet eos; et
quaeret eos, et non inveniet; et dicet: Vadam, et revertar
ad virum meum priorem, quia bene mihi erat tunc magis
quam nunc.

Et haec nescivit, quia ego dedi ei frumentum, et vinum,
et oleum, et argentum multiplicavi ei, et aurum, quae
fecerunt Baal.

Ideirco convertar, et sumam frumentum meum in tempore
suo, et vinum meum in tempore suo. Et liberabo lanam

"Introduction to the Prophets, " Ierusalem Bible, p. 1135 .

 

117

meam et linum meum, quae operiebant ignominiam
eius . . .

Et visitabo super eam dies Baalim, quibus accendebat
incensum, et ornabatur in aure sua, et monili suo. Et
ibat post amatores suos, et mei obliviscebatur, dicit
Dominus .

Propter hoc ecce ego lactabo earn, et ducam earn in
solitudinem, et loquar ad cor eius.

Et dabo ei vinitores eius ex eodem loco, et vallem
Achor, ad aperiendam spem; et canet ibi iuxta dies

iuventis suae, et iuxta dies ascensionis suae de terra r
Aegypti. 7
Et erit in die illa, ait Dominus: Vocabit me vir meus,

et non vocabit me ultra baali.
Et auferam nomina Baalim de ore eius, et non recordabitur
ultra nominis eorum.
Et percutiam cum eis foedus in die illa, cum bestia agri, -
et cum volucre caeli, et cum reptili terrae; et arcum, et 1L_J
gladium, et bellum, conteram de terra, et dormire eos
faciam fiducialiter.
Et sponsabo te mihi in sempiternum: et sponsabo te mihi
in iustitia, et iudicio, et in misericordia, et in misera-
tionibus. ,
Et sponsabo te mihi in fide; et scies quia ego Dominus .
Et erit in die illa: Exaudiam, dicit Dominus, exaudiam
caelos; et illi exaudient terram.
Et terra exaudiet triticum, et vinum, et oleum, et haec
exaudient Iezrahel.
Et seminabo eam mihi in terra, et miserebor eius quae
fuit Absque misericordia.
Et dicam Non populo meo: Populus meus es tu:
Et ipse dicet: Deus meus es tu.

(Osee 2:5-9, 13-24 Vulg.)

 

. . . she said: Iwill go after my lovers, that give
me bread, and my water, my wool, and my flax, my oil
and my drink.

Wherefore behold I will hedge up thy way with
thorns , and Iwill stop it up with a wall, and she shall
not find her paths.

And she shall follow after her lovers , and shall not
overtake them: and she shall seek them, and shall not
find, and she shall say: Iwill go, and return to my
first husband, because it was better with me then,
than now.

And she did not know that I gave her corn and wine
and oil, and multiplied her silver, and gold, which

 

 

 

‘er—fi

118

they have used in the service of Baal.

Therefore will I return, and take away my corn in
its season and my wine in its season, and Iwill set
at liberty my wool, and my flax, which covered her
disgrace . . .

And I will visit upon her the days of Baalim, to
whom she burnt incense, and decked herself out with
her earrings , and with her jewels , and went after her
lovers , and forgot me, saith the Lord.

Therefore, behold I will allure her, and will lead
her into the wilderness; and I will speak to her heart.
And I will give her vinedressers out of the same
place, and the valley of Achor for an opening of hope:
and she shall sing there according to the days of her
youth, and according to the days of her coming up out

of the land of Egypt.

And it shall be in that day, saith the Lord, that she
shall call me: My husband, and she shall call me no
more Baali.

And I will take away the name of Baalim out of her
mouth, and she shall no more remember their name.

And in that day I will make a covenant with them,
with the beasts of the field, and with the fowls of the
air, and with the creeping things of the earth: and I
will destroy the bow, and the sword, and war out of
the land; and Iwill make them sleep secure.

And I will espouse thee to me for ever: and I will
espouse thee to me in justice, and judgment, and in
mercy, and in commiserations.

And I will espouse thee to me in faith: and thou
shalt know that I am the Lord.

And it shall come to pass in that day: Iwill hear,
saith the Lord, Iwill hear the heavens, and they shall
hear the earth.

And the earth shall hear the corn, and the wine,
and the oil, and these shall hear Iezrahel.

And Iwill sow her unto me in the earth, and I will
have mercy on her that was without mercy.

And I will say to that which was not my people:
Thou art my people: and they shall say: Thou art my God.

(Osee 2:5-9, 13-24 Douay)

The wedding imagery of God's love for his people is taken up by
Jeremiah, the second part of Isaiah and, in its most influential form,

The Song of Songs. "The full Hebrew title is 'The Song of Songs, which

in

 

1!“. oc- raw '

u
I
J

.7

. )
3

usuifl
a pa
”bunt.

wrfifi

1.33..

1marr

l:~l’ybt\

Hilf-

busy:

f):
(Y)

'.11.

it.

rm

[(17

 

119

is Solomon's .' The first half is a periphrastic Hebrew way of expressing
the superlative, hence the meaning is 'the best of songs' . . . The
second half of the title is generally considered by modern scholars as a
literary device whereby the poem is attributed to Solomon in the same
manner as the book of Wisdom is attributed to him, though written at a
much later date . Its canonicity has always been recognized by the Church. “'1
Among the Iews there were some doubts in the first century A.D. , but

these were dispelled in the Synod of Iabneh [or Iamnia] (c. A.D. 100),

 

chiefly by the authority of R. Aquilia who said, 'All the Hagiographra I

are holy, but the Canticle is most holy."'2
Among modern interpreters, The Song of Songs is regarded gen—

erally as an erotic poem with or without a higher aim of describing love

in its purest form or of extolling the excellence of monogamy and con-

iugal fidelity. The Fathers of the Church, however, were so strongly

convinced of the spiritual meaning that they ignored the literal sense.

The strongest argument for admitting a higher and spiritual sense in the

S_orgg_ is the tradition which, as we have seen, existed in Ezekiel, Isaiah,

Jeremiah, and Osee representing Yahweh's relation to Israel as a marriage.
Interpreters from Hippolytus to modern times have applied the

analogy to the union of Christ with the Church. The basis for such an in-

terPretation is provided by the New Testament. a

2RP. Saydon, rev. by G. Castellino, "Song of Songs" in A New Catho-
li_<3Commentary on Holy Scripture, ed. , Rev. Reginald Fuller, Rev. Leonard

Johnston, Very Rev. Conleth Kearns (1953; London: Nelson, 1969), pp.
522-33.

 

120

In the New Testament, Iesus applies the title of Bridegroom to
himself when Iohn the Baptist's disciples question why Christ‘s disciples

were not fasting as they did.

And Jesus said to them: Can the children (attendants)
of the bridegroom mourn, as long as the bridegroom is
with them? But the days will come, when the bride-
groom shall be taken away from them, and then they
shall fast.

Mt. 9:15

This imagery is used again in the parable of the marriage feast

beginning,"The Kingdom of heaven is likened to a king, who made a mar-

 

riage for his son . . ." (Mt. 22:2), and climaxes in the exhortation that
all guests at a wedding feast are to wear wedding garments.

In the parable of the foolish and wise virgins (Mt. 25:1—13),
commentators tend to identify the Bridegroom with Christ and the Bride
with the Church.

This is one of Paul's favorite themes as evidenced in 2 Cor. , 11:2:

For I am jealous of you with the jealousy of God. For

I have espoused you to one husband that I may present

you as a chaste virgin to Christ.
This extended meaning, that is, the identification of the bridegroom with
Christ and the bride with the individual soul, may have come into common
use in the Middle Ages through Origen's Commentary on the Canticle,
translated by Rufinus.3

[Tertio vero expositiones] loco introducamus animam,
cujus omne studium sit conjungi et consociari verbo
Dei, et intra mysteria sapientiae ejus ac scientiae

3
Butler, p. 110.

L Lw f“ _ _.

121

velut sponsi coelestis thalamos intrare, cuique animae
praesentia etiam ipsius munera data sunt, dotis scilicet
nomine. Sicut enim Ecclesiae dos fuit legis et pro-
phetarum volumina, ita huic lex naturae et rationalis
sensus ac libertas arbitrii dotalia munera deputentur.
Habens autem haec dotis suae munera, sit ei primae
eruditionis doctrina a monitoribus doctoribusque descen-
dens . Sed quoniam in his non est ei plena atque per-
fecta desiderii sui et amoris expletio, deprecetur ut
mens ejus pura et virginalis, ipsius verbi Dei illumina-
tionibus et visitationibus illustretur. Cum enim nullo
hominis vel angeli ministerio divinis sensibus et in-
tellectibus mens impletur, tunc ipsius oscula verbi

Dei suscipere sese credat Propter haec ergo et hujus—
modi oscula dicat anima orans ad Deum: Osculetur me _
ab osculo oris sui. Dum enim incapax fuit, ut ipsius I}

 

 

Verbi Dei caperet meram solidamque doctrinam, neces-
saria suscepit oscula, id est sensus ab ore doctorum;
ubi vero Sponte jam coeperit obscura cemere, enodare
perplexa, involuta dissolvere, parabolas et aenigmata,
dictaque sapientum compententibus intelligentiae lineis
explicare, tunc jam oscula ipsius sponsi sui, id est
Verbi Dei, suscepisse se credat. Ideo autem oscula
pluraliter posuit, ut intelligamus uniuscujusque obscuri
sensus illuminationem, osculum esse Verbi Dei ad ani-
mam perfectam delatum. Et secundum hoc forte dicebat
prophetica et perfecta mens: Os meum aperui et attraxi
spiritum. Os autem sponsi intelligimus virtutem Dei,
qua illuminat mentem, et velut sermone quodam amoris
ad earn facto, si tamen capere mereatur tantae virtutus
praesentiam, incognita quaeque sibi et obscura mani—
festat, et hoc est verius propiusque, et sanctius os—
culum, quod a sponso Dei verbo porrigi dicitur sponsae,
purae scilicet animae, et perfectae.

(Bk. I, Sect. 37, mag, XIII,

85—86)

Let us bring in the soul whose only desire is to be united
to the Word of God and to be in fellowship with Him,

and to enter into the mysteries of His wisdom and knowl-
edge as into the chambers of her heavenly Bridegroom;
which soul has already received His gifts - that is to
say, her dowry. For, just as the Church's dowry was
the volumes of the Law and the Prophets , so let us re—
gard natural law and reason and free will as the soul's
betrothal gifts. And let the teaching, which comes down
to her from her masters and teachers , following on these

 

122

gifts of her natural endowment, be to her for her earliest
instruction. But, since she does not find in these the
full and perfect satisfaction of her desire and love, let
her pray that her pure and virginal mind may be en-
lightened by the illumination and the visitation of the
Word of God Himself. For, when her mind is filled

with divine perception and understanding without the
agency of human or angelic ministration, then she may
believe she has received the kisses of the Word of God
Himself.

For this reason, then, and for the sake of these kisses,
let the soul say in her prayer to God: 'Let him kiss me
with the kisses of His mouth.‘ For as long as she was
incapable of receiving the solid and unadulterated doc-
trine of the Word of God Himself, of necessity she re-
ceived 'kisses,‘ that is, interpretations, from the mouth
of teachers. But, when she has begun to discern for
herself what was obscure, to unravel what was tangled,
to unfold what was involved, to interpret parables and
riddles and the sayings of the wise along the lines of
her own expert thinking, then let her believe that she
has now received the kisses of the Spouse Himself,
that is , the Word of God.

Moreover, the plural, 'kisses' is used in order that we
may understand that the lighting up of every obscure
meaning is a kiss of the Word of God bestowed on the
perfected soul. And it was perhaps with reference to
this that the prophetic and perfected soul declared: "I
opened my mouth and drew breath. "

And let us understand that by the 'mouth' of the Bride-
groom is meant the power by which He enlightens the
mind and, as by some word of love addressed her so
she deserved to experience the presence of power so
great - makes plain whatever is unknown and dark to
her. And this is the truer, closer, holier kiss, which
is said to be granted by the Bridegroom-Word of God to
the Bride — that is to say, to the pure and perfect

soul . . .

4Origen, The Song of Songs; Commentary, Book One, in The Song of
§9119§ Commentary and Homilies, trans. and annotated by R.P. Lawson.
VOL 26 of Ancient Christian Writers: The Works of the Fathers in Trans-
133,123. ed. by Johannes Quasten and Ioseph C. Plumpe (Westminister,

Mal'Yland, The Newman Press, 1957), pp. 60-62.

 

 

 

“‘3 ‘5
..Ali 1

h E

Iv-r“

.\i""
a

1‘
w .
run“ I

' \
We r
.‘...&e L

6“...“ .
Ailll) \I

01

(I‘D

 

123

The idea that Iesus Christ is the bridegroom and the soul the
bride is found in Augustine (Tract. 2 in Epist. loan. , Tract. 8 in Epi_.s_t.
1211., Psalms 57 and 64, De Symb., lib. 2, cap 32, and De Verb. Apost. ,
ser.3l, cap. 68), and at least once in Gregory (Hom. in Ezech, II, iii,

8). However, it is in the mystical tradition proper that the bridegroom-
bride relationship is applied to Christ and the individual soul with elabora-
tion and deep exploration of the possibilities of expressing a mystical
experience in terms of human love and the marriage consummation and
bond.

Evelyn Underhill finds it is "natural and inevitable that the
imagery of human love and marriage should have seemed to the mystic
the best of all images of his own 'fulfillment of life'; his soul's surrender,
first to the call, finally to the embrace of Perfect Love. It lay ready to
his hand; it was understood of all men; and, moreover, it certainly does
offer, upon lower levels , a strangely exact parallel to the sequence of
states in which man's spiritual consciousness unfolds itself, and which
form the consummation of the mystic life."

The first to give utterance to the realities of the mystical ex—
perience in terms of a sublimated human love was Plotinus.
So we always move around the One . . . When we do,
we attain the end of our existence, and our repose, and
we no longer sing out of tune, but form in very truth a

divine chorus round the One.

In this choral dance the Soul sees the fountain of life

5Mysticism, pp. 136-137.

 

 

124

and the fountain of Spirit, the source of Being, the
cause of Good, the root of Soul. These do not flow

out of the One in such a way as to diminish it; for

we are not dealing with material quantities, else the
products of the One would be perishable, whereas they
are eternal, because their source remains not divided
among them, but constant. Therefore the products

too are permanent, as the light remains while the sun
remains . For we are not cut off from our source nor
separated from it, even though the bodily nature inter—
venes and draws us towards itself, but we breathe and
maintain our being in our source, which does not first
give itself and then withdraw, but is always supplying
us, as long as it is what it is. But we are more truly
alive when we turn toward it, and in this lies our well-
being. To be far from it is isolation and diminution.

In it our Soul rests , out of reach of evil; it has ascended
to a region which is pure from all evil; there it has
spiritual vision, and is exempt from passion and suf-
fering; there it truly lives. For our present life, with—
out God, is a mere shadow and mimicry of the true life.
But life yonder is an activity of the Spirit, and by its
peaceful activity it engenders gods also, through its con-
tact with the One, and Beauty, and Righteousness, and
Virtue. For these are the offspring of a Soul which is
filled with God, and this is its beginning and end - its
beginning because from this it had its origin, its end
because the Good is there, and when it comes there it
becomes what it was. For our life in this world is but

a falling away, an exile, and a loss of the Soul's wings .
The natural love which the Soul feels proves that the
Good is there; this is why paintings and myths make
Psyche the bride of Cupid. Because the Soul is different
from God, and yet springs from him, she loves him of
necessity; when she is yonder she has the heavenly love,
when she is here below, the vulgar. For yonder dwells
the heavenly Aphrodite, but here she is vulgarized and
corrupted, and every Soul is Aphrodite. This is figured
in the allegory of the birthday of Aphrodite, and Love who
was born with her. Hence it is natural for the Soul to
love God and to desire union with Him, as the daughter

6The Aphrodite referred to by Plotinus is the Greek goddess of love
and beauty regarded usually as the daughter of Zeus and Oceanid. As
such, she would be roughly equivalent to the Word in the Christian Trini-
ty. The analogy of the two Aphrodites is found in Plato.

 

 

125

of a noble father feels a noble love. But when, de-
scending to a generation the Soul, deceived by the
false promises of a lover, exchanges its divine love
for a mortal love, it is separated from its father and
submits to indignities; but afterwards it is ashamed of
these disorders and purifies itself and returns to its
father and is happy. Let him who has not had this ex-
perience consider how blessed a thing it is in earthly
love to obtain that which one most desires, although
the objects of earthly loves are mortal and injurious
and loves of shadows, which change and pass; since
these are not the things which we truly love, nor are
they are good, nor what we seek. But yonder is the
true object of our love, which it is possible to graSp
and to live with and truly to possess, since no envelope
of flesh separates us from it. He who has seen it knows
what I say, that the Soul then has another life, when it
comes to God and having come possesses him, and
knows , when in that state, that it is in the presence

of the dispenser of true life, and that it needs nothing
further. On the contrary, it must put off all else, and
stand in God alone, which can only be when we have
pruned away all else that surrounds us. We must then
hasten to depart hence, to detach ourselves as much as
we can from the body to which we are unhappily bound,
to endeavour to embrace God with all our being, and to
leave no part of ourselves which is not in contact with
him. Then we can see Him and ourselves, as far as is
permitted: we see ourselves glorified, full of spiritual
light, or rather we see ourselves as pure, subtle, ethe-
real, light; we become divine, or rather we know our-
selves to be divine. Then indeed is the flame of life
kindled, that flame which, when we sink back to earth,
sinks with us.

Why then does not the Soul abide yonder? Because it
has not yet wholly left its earthly abode. But the time
will come when it will enjoy the vision without inter-
ruption , no longer troubled with the hindrances of the
body. The part of the Soul which is troubled is not the
part which sees , but the other part, when the part which
sees is not reason, but something greater than and prior
to reason, something presupposed by reason, as is the
object of vision. He who then sees himself, when he
sees will see himself as a simple being, will be united
to himself as such, will feel himself become such. We
ought not even to say that he will _s__e__e_, but he will be

 

 

 

126

that which he sees, if indeed it is possible any longer
to distinguish or imagine two things; he becomes
another, he ceases to be himself and to belong to
himself. He belongs to Him and is one with Him,

like two concentric circles; they are one when they
coincide, and two only when they are separated. It
is only in this sense that the Soul is other. There-
fore this vision is hard to describe. For how can one
describe, as other than oneself, that which, when
one says it, seemed to be one with oneself?

At the height of this period of mysticism, in the twelfth cen-

tury, The Canticle of Canticles had many commentators. This book, in—

deed, provided a wonderful theme for mystical thought. The writers of

the twelfth century, for whom realities only counted in so far as they

held hidden some divine teaching, were passionately attached to the

great symbolism of the most excellent of Canticles.

Richard of St. Victor has given us one of the most detailed ap-

plications of the symbolism of marriage to the strivings of the spirit of

. . 9 . .
man. The work is De Quator Gradibus Violente Charitatis . He d1v1des

the striving into four steps. He calls these steps the betrothal, the mar—

riage, copulation and child bearing. [In primo gradu fit desponsatio, ll’l

SECundo nuptiae, in tertio copula, in Quarto puerperium . . . De quarto

di(3111115 . Concepimus, et quasi parturivimus et peperimus spiritum (Isa.

, 9, in The Philosophy of Plotinus, trans . ,

—m
PIOtinus, Ennead, VI ' G een and C0. ' 1948)

William Ralph Inge, 3rd ed. (London: Longm
Pp. 191-193 .
8Pierre Pourrat, pp. 63—64.

9P.L., CXCVI, 1207.

 

 

 

 

'1‘:.a|]
‘
q
n “:1 ”I
._..a‘ “I

j-1 . .
:J-H dr‘

.. oq'cf‘

,. ...Iv.l

g
7': W,
"n. wb‘ U

.1.

JG'QE‘

vi»

‘flin
.4. fl

PIA‘
u ‘l'l
“a."

Ll

i‘r

a."

‘.A

 

127

xviii, 26) .]10 Underhill explains the four stages by describing the be-
trothal as the soul "thirsting for the Beloved; the Spirit comes to the
soul, and seems sweeter than honey." It is conversion, the awakening
to mystical truth; the kindling of the passion for the Absolute. "Then
the Soul with pertinacity demands more": because of her burning desire
she attains to pure contemplation, and so passes to the second degree

of love. In this she is "led in bridal" by the Beloved. Ascending "above

herself" in contemplation, she "sees the Sun of Righteousness." She is

now confirmed in the mystic life; the irrevocable marriage vows are made

between her Spirit and her God. At this point she can "see the Beloved, "

but "cannot yet come in to Him." In Richard's "third stage," however,

that of union, or wedlock, it is clear that the soul enters upon the "uni-

tive way." She has passed the stages of ecstatic and significant events,

and is initiated into the Life. She is "deified, " "passes utterly into God,

and is glorified in Him"; is transfigured, he says, by immediate contact

with the Divine Substance, into an utterly different quality of being . In

the fourth degree, the Bride who has been so greatly honoured, caught up

r own will and "is humiliated be—

to such unspeakable delight, sinks he

low herself. " She accepts the pains and duties in the place of the rap-

a ”parent" of fresh spiritual life.

tures of love; and becomes a source.

e Mater DivinaeGratia_e_. That imperative

The Sponsa Dei develops into th

need of life, to push on, to create, to spread, is here seen operating in

10P.L., CXCVI, 1216.

 

 

128

the spiritual sense .11

"The interpretation of the Canticle, most commonly known in
the twelfth century, is that of St. Bernard. According to him the bride-
groom is Iesus, the bride is the Church and the fervent soul, the com~
panions of the bride are those souls, still imperfect, which aspire to the
rank of brides , the friends of the bridegroom are the angels. 12 Before

becoming a bride it is necessary to begin by being the companion of the

 

bride; the exercises of asceticism, in fact, must precede the sweetness

of mystical union. In his commentary, the Abbot of Clairvaux also deals ' .J

 

fairly often with Christian mortification, with the destruction of vice and
the development of virtue , in a word, with that which the companion of
the bride must do in order to become herself a bride and enjoy the mys-

. l
tical embrace of the bridegroom."
Saint Bernard is explicit from the beginning of his commentary

that his subject is marriage as an analogy of union of the soul and God.

He says:

Excellit in naturae donis affectio haec amoris ,
praesertim cum ad suurn recurrit principium, quod
est Deus . Nec sunt inventa aeque dulcia nomina,
quibus Verbi animaeque dulces ad invicem expri-
merentur affectus, quemadmodum sponsus et spon-
sa: quippe quibus omnia communia sunt, nil pro-
prium nil a se divisum habentibus . Una utriusque
haereditas, una domus, una mensa, unus torus,

11
Underhill, pp . 139-140 .

12
St. Bernard, Sermons I, 8; VIII. 8:X1V: 5-

13
Pourrat, pp . 65-66 .

 

 

 

 

129

una etiam caro.
' P.L., CLXXXIII. 807.

Among all the natural endowments of man love holds
first place, especially when it is directed to God,
who is the source whence it comes. No sweeter
names can be found to embody the sweet interflow
of affections between the Word and the soul, than
bridegroom and bride. Between these all things are
equally shared, there are no selfish reservations ,
nothing that causes division. They share the same
inheritance, the same table, the same home, the
same marriage—bed, they are flesh of each other's
flesh.

(Sermon 7: II, 2)

In the eighty-third sermon of his Commentary, Bernard is par-

 

ticularly eloquent on the glories of spiritual marriage. I will quote a

large portion of the sermon because it summarizes the thought of the most

influential author on the subject of spiritual marriage, and because it

will serve as a firm basis for comments about the tradition as they appear

in The Pearl.

jam vero animae reditus , conversio ejus ad Verbum,
reformandae per ipsum, conformandae ipsi. In quo?
In charitate.

Talis conformias maritat animam Verbo, cum cui
videlicet similis est per naturam, similem nihilominus
ipso se exhibet per voluntatem, diligens sicut dilecia
est. Ergo, si perfecte diligit, nupsit. Quid hac con-
formitate jucundius? quid optabilius charitate, qua
fit ut humano magisterio non contenta, per temet, o
anima, fiducialiter accedas ad Verbum, Verbo constan-
ter inhaereas , Verbum familiariter percuncteris , con-
sultesque de omni re, quantum intellectu capax, tan-
tum audax desiderio? Vere spiritualis, sanctique
connubii contractus est iste. Parum dixi contractus:
complexus est. Complexus plane, ubi idem velle,

et nolle idem, unum facit spiritum de duobus. Nec
verendum ne disparitas personarum claudicare in ali—
quo faciat convenientiam alias , conniventiam] volun-

 

 

130

tatum, quia amor reverentiam nescit. Ab amando
quippe amor, non ab honorando denominatur.

Honoret sane qui horret, qui stupet, qui metuit,

qui miratur: vacant haec omnia penes amantem.

Amor sibi abundat, amor ubi venerit, caeteros in se
omnes traducit et captivat affectus . Properrea quae
amat, amat, et aliud novit nihil. Sponsus et sponsa
sunt. Quam quaeris aliam inter sponsos necessitu-
dinum vel connexionem, praeter amari, et amare? . . .

Deus, qui ait: Si ego paterg ubi est honor meus?
Verum id Pater. Sed, si sponsum exhibeat, puto

quia mutabit vocem, et dicet: Si ego sponsus, ubi
est amor meus? Nam et ante ita locutus est: Si ego
Dominus, ubi est timor meus? (Malach. I, 6) Exi-
get ergo Deus timeri ut Dominus, honorari ut pater,

et us sponsus amari. Quid in his praestat, quid
eminet? Nempe amor. Absque hoc et timor poenam
habet, et honor non habet gratiam . . . Sed horum
neutrum acceptabit Deus , si melle amoris condita

non fuerint. Is per se sufficit, is per se placet, et
propter se . Ipse meritum, ipse praemium est sibi.
Amor praeter se non requirit causam, non fructum.
Fructus ejus, usus ejus. Amo quia amo; amo, ut
amem. Magna res amor . . . Solus est amor ex
omnibus animae motibus, sensibus atque affectibus,
in quo potest creatura, etsi non ex aequo, respondere
auctori, vel de simili mutuam rependere vicem. Ver-
bi gratia, si mihi irascatur Deus, num illi ego similiter
reira car? Non utique, sed pavebo, sed contremiscam
sed veniam deprecabor . . . Nunc jam videas de
amore quam aliter sit. Nam, cum amat Deus, non
aliud vult quam amari: quippe non ad aliud amat nisi
ut ametur sciens ipso amore beatos qui se amaverint . . .

Purus amor mercenarius non est. Purus amor spe vires
non sumit, nec tamen diffidentiae damna sentit. Spon-
sae hic est, quia hoc sponsa est quaecunque est.
Sponsae res et spes unus est amor. Hoc sponsa abun—
dat, hoc contentus et sponsus. Nec is aliud quaerit,
nec illa aliud habet. Hinc ille sponsus, et sponsa
illa est. Is sponsis proprius est, quem alter nemo
attingat, nec filius quidem . . . Sponsi amor, imo
sponsus Amor solam amoris vicem requirit et fidem.

Liceat pro inde redamare dilectam . . . Quidni ametur
Amor"?

.. I'.‘

 

 

131

Merito cunctis renuntians affectionibus aliis, soli et
tota incumbit amori, quae ipsi respondere amori
habet in redhibendo amore. Nam et cum se totam
effuderit in amorem, quantum est hoc ad illius fontis
perenne profluvium? Non plane pari ubertate fluunt
amans et Amor, anima et Verbum, sponsa et sponsus ,
Creator et creatura, non magis quam sitiens et fons .
Quid ergo? peribit propter hoc, et ex toto evacua—
biur nupturae votum, desiderium suspirantis, amantis
ardo, praesumentis fiducia, quia non valet ex aequo
currere cum gigante, dulcedine cum melle contendere;
lenitate cum agno, candore cum lilio, claritate cum
sole, charitate cum eo qui charitas est? Non. Nam,
et si minus diligit creatura, quoniam minor est; tamen
si ex tota se diligit, nihil deest ubi totum est. Prop—
terea, ut dixi, sic amare, nupsisse est: quoniam non
potest sic diligere, et parum dilecta esse ut in con- , '
sensu duorum integrum stet perfectumque connubium. “ ,J
Nisi quis dubitet, animam a Verbo et prius amari, et
plus . Prorsus et praevenitur amando, et vincitur.
Felix, quae meruit praeveniri in tantae benedictione
dulcedinis! Felix, cui tantae suavitatis complexum
experiri donatum est! quod non est aliud, quam amor
sanctus et castus, amor suavis , et dulcis; amor tan-

‘ tae serenitatis, quantae et sinceritatis; amor mutuus,
intimus , validusque, qui non in carne una, sed uno
plane in spiritu duos jungat, duos faciat jam non duos,

sed unum, Paulo ita dicente: Qui adhoeret Deo, unus
spiritus est.

 

 

(I Cor. vi, 17)14

The return of the soul is its conversion, that is, its
turning to the Word; to be reformed by Him and to be
rendered conformable to Him. In what respect? In
charity. It is that conformity which makes as it were,
a marriage between the soul and the Word, when,
being already like unto Him by its nature, it endeavors
to show itself like unto Him by its will, and loves
Him as it is loved by Him. And if this love is per-
fected, the soul is wedded to the Word. What can

be more full of happiness and joy than this confor-
mity? What more to be desired than this love, which
makes thee, 0 soul, no longer content with human
guidance, to draw near with confidence thyself to the

14
LI... CLXXXIII, 1182-1184.

 

 

132

Word, to attach thyself with constancy to Him,

to address Him familiarly and consult Him upon

all subjects , to become as receptive in thy intelli—
gence as fearless in thy desires? This is the con-
tract of a marriage truly spiritual and sacred. And

to say this is to say little; it is more than a contract,
it is embracement (complexus). Embracement surely,
in which perfect correspondence of wills makes of

two one spirit. Nor is it to be feared that the inequal-
ity of the two who are parties to it should render im-
perfect or halting in any respect this concurrence of
wills; for love knows not reverence. Love receives

its name from loving, not honouring. Let one who is
struck with dread, with astonishment, with fear,

with admiration, rest satisfied with honouring; but

all these feelings are absent in him who loves. Love
is filled with itself, and where love has come it over-
comes and transforms all other feelings . Wherefore
the soul that loves, loves, and knows nought else.
They are Bridegroom and Bride. What other bond or
constraining force do you seek for between spouses
than to be loved and to love? . . . God says: If I

be Father, where is My honour? He says that as a
Father. But if He declares Himself to be a Bridegroom,
will He not change the word and say: If I be Bride-
groom, where is My love? For he had previously
said: If I be Lord, where is My fear? God, then, re-
quires that He should be feared as Lord, honoured as
Father, but as Bridegroom loved. Which of these three
is highest and most to be preferred? Surely it is love.

Without it fear is painful and honour without attrac-
tion . . .

Neither of these will He receive if it be not seasoned
with the honey of love. Love is sufficient by itself,
it pleases by itself, and for its own sake. It is itself
a merit, and itself its own recompense. Love seeks
neither cause nor fruit beyond itself. Its fruit is its
use. I love because I love; I love that I may love.
Love, then is a great reality . . . It is the only one
of all the movements, feelings, and affections of the
soul in which the creature is able to respond to its
Creator, though not upon equal terms , and to repay
like with like. For example, if God is wroth with me,
may I similarly be wroth with Him? Certainly not,
but I shall fear and tremble and implore pardon . . .

 

 

 

—
133

But how different is it with love! For when God
loves, He desires nought else than to be loved,
because He loves us for no other purpose than that
He may be loved, knowing that those who love Him
become blessed by their love itself . . .

Love that is pure is not mercenary; it does not draw
strength from hope, nor is it weakened by distrust.
This is the love of the Bride, because all that she is
is only love. The very being of the Bride and her only
hope is love. In this the Bride abounds; with this
the Bridegroom is content. He seeks for nothing else;
she has nothing else. Thence it is that He is Bride—
groom and she is Bride. This belongs exclusively to
a wedded pair, and to it none other attains , not even
a son. The Bridegroom's love, or rather the Bride-
groom who is Love, requires only love in return. How I .
could Love not be loved? ;‘ J
I.

 

 

Rightly then does she renounce all other affections ,
and devote her whole self to Him alone Who is Love,
because she can make a return to Him by a love which
is reciprocal. For even when she has poured her whole
self forth in love, what would that be in comparison to
the everflowing flood of that Fountain? Not with equal
fullness flows the stream of love from the soul and the
Word, the Bride and the Bridegroom, the creature and
the Creator. What then? Shall the desire of her who
is espoused perish and become of no effect, because
she is unable to contend with a Giant who runs His
course, to dispute the palm of sweetness with honey,
of gentleness with the lamb, of brilliance with the sun,
of love with Him Who is Love? No. For although,
being a creature, she love less, because she is less;
nevertheless if she loves with her whole self, noth—
ing is wanting where all is given. Wherefore, as I
have said, to love thus is to be wedded Jnupsissel;
because it is not possible to love thus and yet not to
be greatly loved, and in the consent of the two parties
consists a full and perfect marriage [connubium] . Can
anyone doubt that the soul is first loved, by the Word,
and more dearly? Assuredly it is both anticipated in
loving and surpassed. Happy the soul whose favoured
lot it is to be prevented with the benediction of a de—
light so great. Happy the soul to which is granted to
experience the embracement [Complexus] of such
sweetness, which is nought else than a love holy and

 

 

 

‘.'"

 

134

chaste; a love sweet and delightful; a love as
serene as it is sincere; a love mutual, intimate,
powerful, which not in one flesh, but in one spirit
joins together two, and makes them no more two,
but one according to St. Paul: 'He that is joined
to God is one in spirit.‘

(Butler's trans. , pp. 111—113)
In the eighty-fifth homily, Bernard develops the idea of a spiri-

tual marriage into that of spiritual fruitfulness .

"1
In the latter kind of travail it sometimes happens that -. . '
the soul is so transported out of itself and detached
from the senses, that, though conscious of the Word,
it has no consciousness of itself. This is the case T
when the mind is drawn on by the ineffable sweet- 3 .
ness of the Word, and, as it were, is stolen from it— J
self; or, rather, it is rapt and abides out of itself to '
enjoy the Word. The mind is affected in one way when
it is rendered fruitful by the Word, and in another
when it enjoys the presence of the Word. In the one,
necessity of its neighbor importunes it, in the other
the sweetness of the Word entices it. And, indeed,
a mother has joy in her offspring; but a bride has
greater joy in the embraces of her spouse. Dear are
children,the pledges of affection; but kisses give great-
er joy. It is a good work to save many souls; but to
be transported and to be with the Word, that is far
more delightful. But when does that happen to us , or
how long does it endure? Sweet is that intercourse;
but how seldom does it occur, and for how brief a
time does it last. And this is the final reason for
which the soul seeks the Word; namely, that it may
find delight through enjoying Him.

 

What is it to enjoy the Word? I reply: Let that be
asked rather from him who has had the experience.
Even though it were given to me to have that ex-
perience, how can you think it possible that I should
explain that which is incapable of being put into
words? . . . it has been permitted to me to have had
that experience; it is not at all permitted to me to
express it in speech.

(Cant., lxxxv., 12—14)15

15
Butler, pp. 113-114.

 

135

In the introduction to this chapter, I stated that the theme of
spiritual marriage as used in W underlies the description of the
Pearl Maiden (as she exists in the Heavenly Ierusalem) and not the Vi-
sionary. I may add also that the poet does not present this concept to
us in dynamic form; we do not watch the Maiden reach and consummate
her union with the Lord. Rather it is her dress and certain of her answers
to the narrator's questions which indicate that the tradition of spiritual
marriage is present in the poem.

The white dress of the Pearl Maiden is definitely that of a bride
while reflecting the fashion of the day of the poet, as Gordon has pointed
out. Moreover, it is the symbolic raiment of the Bride of Revelation 19
who is the Chruch. (Both dresses are of finest linen.) In other words ,
the Pearl Maiden is presented visually as a bride; the first level of vi—
sion, the physical, presents her in this way from the moment the Vi-
sionary first spies her at the foot of the cliff to the last moment when he
rushes into the stream in a futile effort to join her. She is always pres-
ent to him as a Bride.

Second, the Visionary, on a deeper level, asks her two very sig—
nificant questions . Perhaps the two are only one in reality: that of iden~
tity. The first question is asked at the beginning of the dialogue or de-
bate in which the Pearl Maiden leads the Visionary to understanding and
acceptance. It is a simple question: What kind of life do you lead?

Bot now I am here in your presente,

I wolde bysech, wythouten debate,
3e woulde me say in sobre asente

 

\f‘

 

 

136
What lyfe 3e lede erly and late.
(11. 389—392)

In other words, we would say, taking into account the serious
context of the question, what have you become?

The Pearl Maiden answers uniquivocally that she has become
the Bride of the Lamb. He called her to marriage and now she is wholly
his and possessor of all his inheritance.

30w wost wel when by perle con schede

I wat3 3ong and tender of age;

Bot my Lorde be Lombe bur3 hys godhede,

He toke myself to hys maryage,

Corounde me quen in blysse to brede

In lenghe of daye bat euer schal wage;

And sesed in alle hys herytage

Hys lef is . I am holy hysse:

Hys prese, hys prys, and hys parage

Is rote and grounde of alle my blysse.
(11. 411—420)

At the end of the debate or dialogue, the narrator again asks
the question and again gets a like response. He phrases the question
differently, but the information wanted is the same. What office of place
do you have in the court of heaven, he inquires. This again can be read
as: What have you become?

Breve me, bry3t, quat Kyn offys
Bere3 be perle so maskelle3 ?
(11. 755-756)

She responds with the same answer in a more extended form than
the first time with a direct quotation from the Song of Songs. She says

she is the Bride of the Lamb and recounts his calling her in the words of

the Bridegroom of that great Song:

‘ g*fl¢“‘o'. ‘

 

\’

 

 

137

He calde me to hys bonerte:
" Cum hyder to me, my lemman swete,
For mote ne spot is non in be. "
He gef me my3t and als bewte;
In hys blod he wesch my wede on dese,
And coronde clene in vergynte,
And py3t me in perle3 maskelle3.
(11. 762-768)

Moreover, the Pearl Maiden picks up a key word from her an—
swer, lemman (beloved, Lover), and uses it again in 11. 794, 805, and
829 0

Finally in section XIV, the narrator asks who is the Lamb that
has called her to be wife above so many others greater than she? She
answers in the words of Revelation and places herself among the 144, 000
who follow the Lamb wheresoever He goes .

The narrator finally does realize her identity because he refers

to her as one chosen to enter Christ's bridal chamber in l. 904.

To Kryste3 chambre bat art ichose.
(l. 904)

Therefore, one of the dimensions of the Pearl Maiden is that of
participant in a spiritual marriage as implied from the Song of Songs
through Old Testament and New Testament times and brought to full flower
with Bernard's great commentary at the height of a great age of mysticism.

A perfected soul in Bernard's affective language is a Bride of
the Word. The perfected daughter of a bereaved father in the fourteenth
century is pictured in just the same terms. The symbolic language of
the mystics in talking of souls who gain a real knowledge of God while

alive, is used by a man who has a vision of a loved one who is dead and

 

f—
I |

\r

 

\/-—«

138

gone to God. He returns , however, to tell his tale. What other words
can he use but the words of the mystics themselves who have been to
heaven, ravished to sacred space, have encountered the Lord and have

been changed utterly for the experience?

 

 

 

3‘1"ij

vii v we
.

{to “f
9.

HIV

dun ‘v

m 9*
;..6.1L

CECE

(1‘
v-1

'0

 

V. IMPLICATIONS OF THE VISION TRADITION
ON THE UNDERSTANDING OF THE PEARL:

TOWARD A TEXTUAL READING AND APPRECIATION

This paper starts from a hypothesis regarding the nature of the
experience which the main personage of The Pearl enjoys. I work from
the premise that within the poem itself certain lines, parts of lines, and,
more importantly, certain attitudes express the presence of several ele-
ments which are not part of the dream tradition. I suggest this, not
because I would deny the very real influence of the dream tradition in the
poem, but because I see in the poem certain characteristics which, I sug—
gest, form another tradition. In the introduction to this paper I pointed
out some definite features of The Pearl which were not present in such
dream literature as the Roman de la Rose, The Pilgrimage of the Life of
Mill}; and The Parliament of Fowls . Specifically, I indicated that there
is a difference between a dream and a vision and that The Pearl is a vi—
sion and not a dream at all. Therefore, I call The Pearl a product of the
vision tradition.

The presence of such a tradition as I describe does not provide
the definitive reading of The Pearl. I believe, however, that it puts the
modern reader more in touch with what one can assume about the medieval
author who wrote it. Besides taking for granted that a very real tradition
was present to him from the dream tradition, I postulate that the elements
of the vision tradition were as present and as important an influence, even

though these characteristics are very foreign to the modern reader.

139

a
!

 

 

point of
it this
.201 fa?
is the

his a

In

 

 

 

140

I will, first of all, gather together the textual evidence for this
point of view. The first, and, perhaps, most convincing characteristic
in this vision tradition surfaces because the Visionary of The Pearl does
not fall asleep and dream a dream. The Visionary, on the contrary, tells

us that in the midst of a "fierce" inner argument between his reason and

his affections -- regarding the acceptance of the loss of his child, his . _.
”pearl" -— he fell upon the ground and slipped into a sudden spell of P
sleep.

Taking into consideration the lines which immediately follow

 

this statement, which describe what I identify as ecstasy, I suggest
that perhaps the Visionary was struck to the ground in somewhat the same
manner as Saul of Tarsus was struck from his horse. For the next lines
seem to me a direct echo of Paul's description of one of his vision ex-
periences . They are:

Fro spot my spyryt ber sprang in space;

My body on balke ber bode in sweuen,

My gost is gon in Gode3 grace

In auenture ber meruayle3 meuen.

I ne wyste in bis worlde quere bat hit wace . . .

Paul says in II Cor. 12 that he knows a man in Christ who was
rapt to the third heaven. And he repeats , "whether in the body, I know
not, or out of the body, I know not; God knoweth. " And Augustine, in
commenting on this quote, concludes that Paul uses this phrase because

he did not know if his Spirit was literally out of his body when he ex-

perienced his vision(s) . The author of The Pearl has simplified the mat—

 

141

ter for us; he clearly explains that the spirit left the body of his Visionary
behind. My point here is that the statement of Paul and Augustine's
gloss on it could be background material for the fourteenth century poem.
Now, line 64 uses the word "aventure"; this reminds us immediately of
the great popularity of The Visio Pauli which claimed to tell of the ad-
ventures of Paul when he was in the third heaven . Of course, of these
"adventures, " Paul himself reports "That he, Paul, was caught up into
Paradise, and heard secret words , which it is not granted to man to ut-

ter (II Cor. 12). The Pearl Visionary echoes this also in 11. 99-100.

 

 

be derbe berof for to deuyse
Nis no wy3 worbe bat tonge bere3 .

Yet another very interesting echo of Paul is found very early in
the poem. The phrase occurs in lines 31—32 and reads:

ber hit doun drof in molde3 dunne;
For vch gresse mot grew of grayne3 dede.

Paul said it this way:

Insipiens, tu quod seminas non vivificatur, nisi
prius moriatur. Et quod seminas, non corpus,
quod futurum est, seminas, sed nudum granum,
ut puta tritici, aut alicuis caeterorum.

ICor. 15:36-37 (Vulg.)

Senseless man, that which thou sowest is not quickened,
except it die first. And that which thou sowest, thou
sowest not the body that shall be; but bare grain, as
of wheat, or of some-of the rest.
I. Cor. 15:36-37 (Douay)
It seems to me that this bit of scripture may be one statement

of the theme upon which the whole of the poem is built. I say this be—

cause the Visionary of the poem does, in the course of the narrative, a1-

 

o F g "
c In
'2 is

“I ”*9

‘.'15101

Fete!

like

[‘13

 

 

142

low his hard core of sorrow and non—understanding to be buried. The at-
titude of the Visionary can be said to die in the course of the poem, as
the fruits of his sorrow, the growth of understanding and acceptance of
the death of a loved one, are in truth the results of his vision experience.
In the course of this paper, I have remarked more than once that a real
vision experience leaves the visionary utterly changed. I have cited
Peter and Paul as the prime examples of changed personalities. I would
like to suggest that the Visionary of The Pearl can be included in this il-
lustrious company at least for his change of viewpoint which is so marked
in that controversial IOlst stanza of the poem.

Now, since the Visionary of The Pearl can be thought of as an
ecstatic Visionary, I was not too surprised to discover in the poem traces
of the contemplative mystical spirit that infused the era from Augustine to
Bernard and beyond . Specifically, I mention again the growing awareness
on the part of the Visionary that the physical sights of the sacred space
wherein his vision takes place dazzle his eyes, but the insights which
he gradually gains are those which satisfy his spirit. This movement is
somewhat synonymous with the movement of the mystic going as it does
from the physical to the more spiritual, from the things of the earth to
those of the spirit. Finally, the height of mystical contemplation is
given flesh in the poem in the person of the Pearl Maiden. The details
of her dress , her position in the procession of the 144, 000 who follow
the Lamb wheresoever he goes and, especially, her precise identification

of herself as a Bride of the Lamb makes her a dramatic explanation of that

 

She cl

 

 

143

very popular medieval concept of the mystical marriage. She not only
claims to be his Bride, but she dramatically in l. 859 claims to know
God as she is known by Him.
We bur3outly hath cnawyng.
She claims also the pledge of Gal. 4:7.
You are no longer a slave but a son. And since
you are a son, you will receive the heritage of a son.
(Douay)
He toke myself to hys maryage,
Corounde me quene in blysse to brede
In lenghe of daye3 bat euer schal wage;
And sesed in alle hys herytage
Hys lef is. I am holy hysse:
(11. 414—418)

Interestingly enough, the Visionary, himself, does not proceed
to union with the Lord which his Pearl Maiden exemplifies . Neither does
he ascend to what Augustine would call. an intellectual vision, a direct
encounter of the Lord. His vision is of a perfected creature, not of the
Creator. Therefore, as I have noted above, he does not see the Lord es-
sentially, or face to face. He sees the iconographic signs of the Lamb
but not Christ. In addition to the Visionary's greater interest in the Pearl
Maiden than the Lamb, we can also quote the words of the Visionary him-
self as an indication of this point:

. .drawen to Godde3 present,
To mo of his mysterys I hade ben dryuen.
(11. 1193—94)
Another item of interest comes in here when we remember that

this is how the poet answered or, maybe, avoided the controversy of his

day concerning the ability of a man to see God and live.

b r-
l

.5 M

‘.k .11 5
19‘» p
.1...Er

an.

H.“ V

L.“
Li»

 

 

144

Finally, the return of the Visionary's spirit to his body seems
to me to strengthen the case for his having had a vision and not a dream.
For ry3t as I sparred vnto be bonc,
bat brathbe out of my drem me brayde.
(11.1169-1170)
The vision ends abruptly and the Visionary "wakes up" in the
other garden. But he goes on to accept his loss in peace.

Implicitly, I believe that the existence of The Pearl in four— .

teenth century England is one indication that the four characteristics I

 

have enumerated -- ecstasy, vision, mystical contemplation, and mys— E
tical marriage -— were living ideas of concern to people of the time. i: J
Moreover, I have been able to show that each of these components of
the vision tradition was rooted in the Apostolic Church and had a more
or less continuous history as accepted, or, at least, controversial ideas
in the course of the centuries.
The understanding of ecstasy, for example, derives from the
Biblical accounts of the ecstatic experiences of Paul, Peter and the
author of the Book of Revelations. Paul's conversion experience proved
to be a particularly rich source of information —- perhaps because the
author of the Aggs retold the story three times and, indeed, punctuated
the growth of the infant Church from the upper room of the Last Supper to
the center of the western world, Rome, with re-tellings of this experience.
From these accounts, it is possible to gather conventions concerning
ecstasy which occur again and again through the ages. The falling to

earth prior to the seeing of his initial vision of the Lord is a good exam-

:‘Ivgrtpr Ci
'.' 'l O J O

,..

oi‘

-nv§
..
.v:

v

an n
in uTLLa“

I

 

 

 

 

 

145

ple. The Visionary of The Pearl does this very thing before his vision
experience.

Further it is possible to cite many instances of visions taking
place in ecstasy from the extra-canonical books . I have cited the §h_p_—
herd of Hermes and the First Acts of the Martyrs as two examples out of
a number in this source.

The complex question of the veracity of ecstasy is next broached
so as to indicate that visions or communications with heavenly personages
need not take place in the para—physical state of ecstasy, but that ec-
stasy may be a component of this experience.

It is also possible to trace the presence of visions in ecstasy
bY consulting theoretical statements explicating them. The citation of
relevant texts from Augustine's de Genesi ad litteram, from Pseudo—-
Dionysius , from Gregory the Great, and from Bernard are included as
representative major statements on the question.

Visions , of course, can be traced from the same biblical sources
because Peter's and Paul's experiences were ecstatic visions. Comments
on these visions reveal that the early church accepted them as viable
vehicles of encounter. It is also possible to cite indications that there
was much interest in the sacred space in which visions occurred. Glosses
On Paul's "third heaven" point this out and the popularity of the y_i_§_i_9_

Pauli reveals the great extent of the interest within the vision tradition.

 

The results of visions also proved to be a point of interest, es—

pecially to the commentators on Paul who find a great amount of specula—

 

 

 

 

146

tion possible on the blindness/sight experience of this Apostle. The
dramatic quality of this component of visions underlies the change which
invariably happens to seers of visions.

From other comments on the same material, it is obvious that
the understanding of a visionary is much closer to essential knowledge
of the heavenly person encountered than it is to mere intellectualization.
The statements of the Pearl Maiden regarding her knowledge of the Bride-
groom seem a real example of this concept working within the vision tra-
dition.

Once again, a number of examples from extra-canonical works
emphasizes the widespread interest in visions as well as continuing the
tradition through the centuries. The Shepherd of Hermes, "The Passion
of Perpetua and Felicitas, " The Pseudo-Clementine Homilies and the cen-
tral Visio Pauli are the examples I included.

It seems quite possible that this interest in and speculation on
visions and their import was also conveyed through the practice of and
interest in contemplation centered in the mystical movement. The truth
of this as a possible human experience can be at least partly verified by
reference to the psychology of the mystics , and to the direct statements
on this gift from the author of Revelation, Paul, Origen, Plotinus, Augus—
tine, Gregory, and Bernard. The centrality of Augustine's statements is
apparent and his three kinds of visions are tentatively applied to parts of

The Pearl.

 

Finally, the unitive effect of visions as mystical marriage is

 

signified
,.
teat-.1165
; ‘.'.
10110: t

wept:

till tr

'm'

 

 

 

 

 

147

examined because the guide-leader figure of The Pearl, the Pearl Maiden,
identifies herself with the Bride figure present in the metaphoric explana—
tion of the soul's relationship to its creator. There is no doubt that this
metaphor is present in tradition at least from the time of the Book of Osee
until the time of St. Bernard's great sermons and is an explicit ingredient
of The Pearl besides being an implicit part of the vision tradition .

The existence of a vision tradition seems to add some depth to [1
an understanding of The Pearl as well as to the bulk of the literature of I

the age. A look at some of the criticism and scholarship on The Pearl

1 .

itself will perhaps help us to hear the poet's communication better. ~_ ,9
Recognition that The Pearl is a vision is certainly not an original
interpretation of the poem. Many critics refer to the whole poem, or parts
of it -- for example, the time Spent in the company of the Pearl Maiden,
or more narrowly, the sight of the new Ierusalem -- as a vision. How-
ever, these same critics also call the personage of the poem a dreamer.
I do not find any clarifying statement which distinguishes between a
dream and a vision, which I hold makes a real difference in explicating
the poem. Neither do I find any statement which suggests that what is
happening is that a vision is occurring in sleep. What results seems to
me to be at least a lack of exact usage of words, and may even indicate
that these critics do not recognize that the typical poet of the Middle
Ages would almost certainly understand that there is a real distinction
between what we see in a dream -- which today we would probably call

the creations of our subconscious -- and what we see in a vision -- which

:s areal u
:mnic

F I I
‘96“ VNI‘ '1
“I‘d. 1"

a: not i
all. I a
tion it

are ei

tutti]

 

 

 

148

is a real understanding gained because we have been gifted with a true
communication with a person who is not alive on earth. The dream comes
from within; the vision from without.

In reviewing some of the criticism connected with the nggl, I
am not attempting to deal with all categories of this criticism. First of
all, I am going to refer only to more recent criticism, under the assump—
tion that the more important critical problems raised by the earlier critics
are either reviewed or reworked in the later criticism. Moreover, I am
Putting aside completely the question of The Pearl being an allegory or an
elegy. I find it a false question. The poem is elegiac whether it is
feigned or not. The poet uses the occasion of death to talk about all
kinds of related human concerns. It is in the tradition from which Milton
was to write his "Lycidas, " which all readers recognize is less about the
dead man than it is about Milton's responses to death in general. Whit
is more important than the question whether the poem is an elegy or not
is the method the poet used to convey his poem, for, if we can come to
understand his method, the meaning will become clearer. Now, the poet
used the vision tradition, not the dream tradition exclusively. Modern
criticism needs to recognize the difference between the two traditions
and to stop using them interchangeably -— to the ultimate further mystifi-

cation rather than explication of the Pearl.

Marie Hamilton1 comes very close to the tentative stance I have

1"The Meaning of the Middle English P__e____arl” in Sir Gawain and Pearl:
Critical Essays ed by Robert I. Blanch (Bloomington: Indiana University
Press, 1966) pp. 37~ 59.

 

we! I E

13.71 i)

 

 

149

taken in some of her details, as, for example, when she says that the
dreamer indicates that the fragrance of the herb garden produced a "sleep-
ing-death"or trance whereby he was granted the vision (p. 50) . More-
over, she adds that the man was granted the mystical slumber which is
both the sign and herald of spiritual illumination (p. 52) . She even calls
the man "ecstatic" in his awakening and says that he had an "adventure
in contemplation" which reached his apex and served its purpose by con-
vincing the dreamer (my emphasis) that the Redemption had indeed taken
place and his soul has shared in it (p. .55).

From my premise this statement is somewhat ambiguous because
of the use of the term dreamer. I think that the fact that the commenta-

tors in the Glossa Ordinaria were very careful to indicate that Peter was

 

awake during his Ioppa experience and that he slept when the messenger
angel delivered him from prison could be taken as partial evidence that
the medieval man would have distinguished the experiences in a dream
from those in a vision —- even though he used the words interchangeably
as the entry in the MED indicates.

Hamilton's use of the word trance (a possible English translation

 

of ekstasis) and ecstatic are, again, not explained. It may be that she
is aware of the rich tradition of this concept, but she gives no statement
to this effect.

D.W. Robertson in "The Pearl as a Symbol, "2 Speaks consistent-

2In The Middle English "Pearl": Critical Essays, ed. by john Conley
(Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame Press, 1970), pp. 18-27.

:i the C
:i the Pe-
thence
tenet
Once a

i l
I I
51%, fl)

 

 

 

150.

1y of the dreamer of the poem and then states: "His yigign (my emphasis)
of the Pearl is a device by means of which the poet may impress upon his
audience, the members of which are in the same situation as the dreamer,
the necessity for regaining and maintaining a life of innocence" (p. 25) .
Once again this terminology confuses the issue; the narrator is not dream-
ing: he is experiencing a vision. r
Even more confusing is Iohnson's statement3 that " . . . the poem 1 h]

is basically a dream or vision allegory in the popular medieval tradition. "

 

it
Again, no explanation of terms; then, he calls the narrator "dreamer" all t
the way through‘the article, but when speaking of the new Ierusalem says: )
"He (the dreamer) is allowed to gaze upon it briefly . . . This ecstatic
and genuinely moving descriptive passage, the climax of the y_i_§_i_g_n (my
emphasis) . . ." (p. 31). Moreover, he calls the major section of the
poem, the central 91 stanzas, a vision; and dwells on the W (my
emphasis) ever increasing desire to cross into greater beauty and says
"the feeling is, in fact, the mystic's wish for union with the perfect, the
desire to attain to a state of perfection" (p. 36) . My point is simple:
Iohnson gives the narrator of W all the participation he wants in
the mystical tradition without defining him and his experience as exactly
as this tradition allows. The use of the word "Visionary" here would in-
clude the whole theological tradition barely hinted at by Johnson.

3
Wendell Stacy Iohnson, "The Imagery and Diction of The Pearl, "
ibid., pp. 27-49.

 

. .--Ion_".
'.'-.J_.\,.v

wu-
.

.,.As-- I

Cf)

 

 

 

151

4 what I find a good ex—

Stanton Hoffman gives in his criticism
plication of the poem. He quotes the lines (63—64) which record the
narrator's spirit leaving his body and says: "This is the theme of Spiri-
tual adventure, the journey of the soul as it goes forth seeking for a
truth . . . The poet's Spirit is instructed and if we learn something also
of man's fate -- something beyond the specific incident of the poem -—
it is, I think, a sign of the poet's success, for this poem answers not
only for the child's death, but in all its extended meanings, for our own
deaths" (p. 102) . I believe if this explication were tied in with the mys—
tical tradition it would even more concretely be dealing with the theme of
the poem on its own terms. For the instruction is a growing experience
within a vision. Hoffman's extension of the implications of the experience
are given even more weight if the original specific example, the Visionary,
has been utterly changed by a vision!

Herbert Pilch5 provides me with more evidence of one of my
points when he says: "the motif of the heavenly vision is also known to
us from numerous legends of the saints such as the Vision of St. Patrick's
Purgatory, and the Vision of Tundale" (p. 183). He goes on to try to dis—
tinguish the place of win the tradition Surrounding the Roman. His
conclusion is that the Pearl poet uses the dream convention but makes a

distinction between his poem and the conventional content of this genre.

4"The Pearl: Notes for an Interpretation! " ibid- , pp. 86‘102'

5"The Middle English Pearl: Its Relation to the Roman de la Rose,"

ibid. , pp. 163-184.

 

 

 

1
(h

F!
7.1:)
,H.‘ l

”t "I

>74

" 1

i

b .

 

152

"He re—interprets its values and places them within the bounds of a
theological poem of consolation" (p. 183). Finally, Pilch recognizes
that the "literary dream" already existed in the prophetic poetry of the

Welsh (Myrddin) and in the Old English Dream of the Rood (p. 184). The

 

direction of Pilch's scholarship is very attractive; with the addition of
even more ancient biblical sources, the most probable milieu of the Egg}
would become even more apparent.

Louis Blenkner in "The Theological Structure of the Pearl, ”6
calls the 339d: "a carefully structured poetic account of a spiritual
itinerary culminating in an ecstasy of mystical contemplation" (p. 221).
He also notes that the "poet shifts from one set of conventions to another
(from those of patently fictional, secular love visions to those of reli-
gious vision considered unquestionably authentic in the Middle Ages)"
(p. 222). He further describes the awakenings as " . . . exhibiting the
traditional characteristics of a contemplative returning from mystical rap-
ture -- sighing, bodily faintness, sorrowful longing after the vanished
vision, and humble submission to the will of God” (p. 224). Then, a~
gain in the confused pattern we have noted above, Blenkner concludes
that the profound psychic change from secular to religious point of view
is because of a dream (p. 225) . Once again, inexactitude of terms makes
the explication less meaningful than it could be.

7

Spearing has a statement in his article which has given me

6111 Conley, pp. 220-271.

7
"Symbolic and Dramatic Development in The Pearl, " ibid. . PP. 122—148.

——~ m?

 

 

 

 

153

added insights into the poem. " . . . the whole force and poignancy
of the poem derives from its basic structure as an encounter involving
human relationships" (p. 101).

It seems to me that the center of the poem -- the debate or di—
dactic passage -— is essentially contemplative because the experience
of the Visionary in that section is one of growing understanding that God's
justice is infinitely more generous than man's mercy. This "knowing"
about the Lord is the result not only of the Pearl Maiden's logic but
more essentially of her person. I believe that the change of attitude of
the Visionary, his growth in understanding, comes about because of the
presence of the Pearl Maiden, because of her inter-relating with the
Visionary —— not because She is knowledgeable. The guide leader here
conveys herself as the essential person who replaces the loss of the
Visionary, not by taking the loss away but by revealing that the loss is
only loss in time -- in eternity the "seed" of loss grows into complete
"fruition" which is union with the Infinite One.

I quoted Hamilton above as saying that the dreamer learned what
redemption was, and that it applied to him. I agree essentially with the
statement, but would like to phrase it differently. I believe that the
Visionary received an essentially mystical gift by which he came to an
understanding of who Christ is by an intimate encounter with a Bride who
is one with Christ.

The fact that the Visionary does not see the essential face of

God in the Lamb is attributed by Spearing (p. 117) to the dreamer's lack

bra
.in:

t
L

 

 

 

 

 

154

of patience. It is the conclusion of an argument which traces the growth
of the dreamer's understanding as being parallel with the deeper and
deeper meanings which the symbol of the pearl acquires in the narrative ~-
he calls it a "synthesis of symbol with drama." Therefore, he says that
the dreamer does not make the complete identification of the Pearl with
the Lamb and-thereby does not see in the stone "the ground of its own
preciousness"; he does "not achieve the mystical experience of seeing
God in a point. " I am in agreement with this viewpoint, but Iwould tend
to think that the Visionary does not see God because the _w_h_gl_e_ tradition
out of which his creator comes, that is, his poet, was not presenting
an intellectual or completely unitive vision such as Paul's or Dante's.
He was presenting a corporeal vision which took on imaginary or spiritual
overtones but never really reached intellectual depth. The Visionary sees
the Creator in the creature; he experiences Christ in the more usual or
human way -— in another person. This encounter is not unitive perhaps
because the poet would have him live and tell his tale completely with—
out resorting to a multi—foliated rose or to silence to explain the experi—
ence. Perhaps the poet believed with Gregory and Bernard that this ex-
perience would result in death —— perhaps the poet was choosing a Side
in the controversy itself.

Whatever the reason, the experience is not that of a soul mar-
ried to the Lord. However, the Pearl Maiden's presence is a living exam-
ple of what a Bride of Christ is -- so the poem does not lack, in one

sense, the complete mystical experience. We do see the results of it in

 

 

 

the perfected girl of the elegy. Her sorrowing father does not reach
perfection but his ”seed of sorrow" is planted in fertile ground which
yields in stanza 101 the peace of a man who has allowed the Lord to
reign in Him as He can in a live human personality.

It seems to me that what the poet is essentially doing is ex—
pressing a basic truth in a metaphor. The basic truth may have some-
thing to do with the potentiality of man. It certainly has to do with the
universal human problem of the mystery of loss and death; and with the
universal problem of how a good God permits evil and suffering. It is
essentially a metaphor for the truth which the man in the gospels dis-
covered which led him to sell all he had to buy the pearl of great price.
Or it may be an incomplete but somewhat satisfying answer to why the
seed must die to bear fruit.

I posit this kind of conclusion very tentatively. I think the
truth of it arises from the beginning of an understanding of the profound-
ly rich tradition which 1400 years of Christianity produced. The limita-
tions of the conclusion or any conclusion are that the poem can not be
explicated from the point of view of any one set of characteristics. The
poem itself islas profound as the long tradition from which it arises. All
criticism of the poem ultimately will not equal the work of art which is
The Pearl. I recommend, however, that we recognize the richness and
the depth which occur because the poem is an expression of the medieval

understanding of and/or experience of the mystical tradition.

 

 

SELECT ED B IELIOG RAPE-71’

' . 3“. II...’ Stun-‘.‘ ,

 

 

 

 

3 E1. CT ED B 1B 1.10GRA 3 I

i—v—

"Apocalypse of Paul. " The Apocqplial New T

._
. ‘11,
’ A

 

 

 

Oxford: The Clarendon Press, 1924.

Aumanon, j. "Contemplation." New Camel: ~

 

 

Bernard of Clairvaux. )n the Song of Songs I.

Trans . Kilian \’~."'alsh .

 

Shannon, Ireland: Irish UniverSity Press,
The Bible. Douay—Rheims Version.
The Bible. Ierusalem Version.
The Bible. Vulgate Version.

Blanch, Robert I. , ed. Sir Gawain and {3:11;};
ington: Indiana University Press, 1966.

 

rY‘

Butler Dom Cutnberi‘. \Ii’estcrn Pt-'I\/::.t:i:"ivrn: 1
I _‘- __‘.._

 

Gregory and Bernard on Contemplation and

.——_..._ —-.____—_ “-5

{WP-7

J I o

4 ‘ ‘ r, ‘ ' , .. ' .1, , v~.
(TITS al 11.: sag. s . bloom-

 

; rr .* --_, .r A .-_. ---:,_
"3 .‘Pdffl’ffT (7'- NH If." ."3

.. ————4———— ‘.‘... —._—..4_—— —-—.q __.—-__

I

 

the: (fonien‘plative Lia.

 

3rd ed. London: Constable, 1967.

r1

Chaucer, Geoffrey. "The Parliament of Totals,
0181192:- Ed. F.N. Robinson. 2nd ed. for.

1957.

Clogs, A. "Ecstasy. " New Catholic Eric-yo} fiiww

...

 

Conley, john, ed. The :\"sl~.;?:ilo Prxrlish "Fegz‘l':

Dame: Univesity of Notre Dame Press

Corbishly, T. "Mysticism." New Catholic Encyclopggiig. 196,

F...)
k0

 

' ‘ ‘ L l . . . —. ‘
L- .393 i e.g....flL '3 . - -:
O .
C

 

de Lorris, Guillaume, and jean de Meun. The

Riva-moo of the Rose . Trans.

 

Harry W. Robbins. New York: E.P. Dutton and Co., Inc., 1902.

Eliade, Mircea. The Sacred and the Profane.

 

Trans. Willard R. Trash.

New York: Harcourt, Brace and World, Inc. , 1959.

156

 

157

Garrigou-Lagrange, R. Christian Perfection and Contemplation. St.
Louis, 1937.

 

Gollancz, Sir Isaac, eri. Pearl: An English Poem of the XIVth Century.
New York: Cooper Square Publishers , 1966.

 

Hastings, james, ed. Dictionary of the Apostolic Church. 2 vols. New
York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1915—1918.

Hennecke, Edgar. New Testament Apocrypha. Ed. Wilhelm Schneemel-
cher. Trans. R. McL. Wilson. 2 vols. Philadelphia: The Westmin-

ster Press, 1963.
james, William. Varieties of Religious Experience. London, 1904.

Katsaros , Thomas , and Nathaniel Kaplan. The Western Mystical Tradi-
tion. New Haven, Conn.: College and University Press, 1969.

Kurath, Hans, and Sherman A. Kuth. The Middle English Dictiongry.
Ann Arbor, Mich.: The University of Michigan Press, 1959.

Liegly, G.M. "Vision (Dream) Literature." New Catholic Encyclopedia.
1967.

Lohkamp, N. A "Mystical Phenomena." New Catholic Encyclopedia. 1967.

Lydgate, john. The Pilgrimage of the Life of Man: Enqlisht (sic.) by
john Lydgate from the French of Guillaume de Deguileville. Early
English Text Society 77, 83, 92. London: EETS, 1899-1904.

Marechal, joseph, S.j. Studies in the Psychology of the Mystics. Trans.
Algar Tharold. London: Burns, Oates and Washboume, Ltd., 1927.

Masterman, M.R.E. "Ecstasy (In the Bible)." New Catholic Encyclope-

dia. 1967.

Migne, jacques Paul, ed. Patrologiae Cursus Completus. Series Graeca.

161 vols. Paris: j.P. Migne, 1863—1891.

Patrologiae Cursus Complegs. Series
Latina. 221 vols. Paris: j.P. Migne, 1863—1891.

 

Morse, Charlotte C. "Saint Augustine's Theory of Visions and the Con-
solation of Philosophy." (Unpublished paper.)

Quasten, johannes. Patrology. 3vols. Westminister, Maryland: The

Newman Press , 1950 .

 

 

“'in'-r

158

Quasten, johannes and joseph C. Plumpe, eds. Ancient Christian Writ-
ers: The Works of the Fathers in Translation. 37 vols. Westminister,
Maryland: The Newman Press, 1946.

"The Shepherd of Hermes." The Apostolic Fathers. Eds. T.E. Page,
E. Cupps, and W.H.D. Rouse. Trans. Kirsopp Lake. New York:
G.P. Putnam's Sons, 1913.

 

The Pearl. Ed. E.V. Gordon. Oxford: At the Clarendon Press, 1953.

Plotinus. "Ennead, VI—IX." The Philosophy of Plotinus. Trans. William
Ralph Inge. 3rd ed. London: Longmans, Green and Co. , 1948.

Poulain, Augustin. The Graces of Interior Prayer. Trans. Leonora L.
Yorke-Smith. London, 1912.

Pourrat, Pierre. Christian Spirituality. 2 vols. Trans. W.H. Mitchell
and S.P. jacques. Westminister, Maryland: The Newman Press, 1953.

Roberts, Alexander, and james Donaldson, eds. The Ante—Nicene Fathers:
Translations of the Writings of the Fathers of the Church Down to
A.D. 325. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Pub. Co., 1951.

Saydon, P . "Song of Songs ." In A New Catholic Commentary on Ho_ly
Scripture. Eds. Reginald Fuller, Leonard johnson, and Conleth
Kearns. 2nd ed. London: Nelson, 1969.

Schaff, Philip, ed. A Select Library of the Nicene and Post—Nicep_e_
@3313. 14 vols. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Pub. Co., 1956.

Silverstein, Theodore. Visio Sancti Pauli: The History of the Apocalypse
in Latin Together with Nine Texts . London: Christophers , 1935 .

Strong, james. The Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible. New York:
Eaton and Mains, 1890.

Sylvia Mary, Sister. Pauline and johannine Mysticism. London: Darton,
Longman and Todd , 1964 .

Underhill, Evelyn. Mysticism: A Study in the Nature and Developmergg
of Man's Spiritual Consciousness. 11th ed. London: Methuen and

Co. , 1949.

 

‘
I
:1" It [JV I
. .ififl.‘l.‘.lUw

 

 

 

ARIES

llHllllllllllill"IIIlllHilllIiIlll)liliiillll'li
31 293 1 04

 

I
024371