The ins and outs of mysticism

Abstract

IMACaNE AN trtO~C;RADUATE who did not wish to study anthropology, history, politics, sociology, or any of the humanities, but had come to university to learn about mysticism. It would not be easy to recommend which department he or she should approach. Departments of Philosophy usually offer a subject called "Philosophy of Religion', but it tends to be a disguised course in metaphysics, its curriculum consisting of the standard proofs of God's existence and a consideration of the problem of evil. The list of prescribed reading is more likely to include works by Aquinas and Hume than by Julian of Norwich or Walter Hilton. Here mystics may be studied in terms of culture, poetics, rhetoric or stylistics; but even if they are read in their own right, and not just to illumine a canonical literary text such as Piers Plowman, they will never be studied alongside Jacob Bohme, Meister Eckhart, Catherine of Genoa or St Teresa of Jesus. One might think that a Department of Theology would be the best place to study mystical writings in depth. But again one would be disappointed. Mysticism generally falls outside vocational training, and theologians have traditionally regarded it with suspicion, perhaps fearing (not unreasonably) that some of its most seductive motifs are independent of Christianity. If the study of mysticism falls between disiciplines, it is because it requires an interdisciplinary approach. One of the things that has characterised Max Charlesworth's intellectual life is a profound commitment to interdisciplinarity. That commitment does not overlook a due stress on the classical disciplines. Their histories, methodologies and protocols must be respected; but that is a different thing from accepting them as a natural way of dividing the world of ideas. (Learn some philosophy, literature and theology, Charlesworth would advise the student, but do not keep them in separate mental compartments.) To say that Charlesworth's work has centred on the philosophy of religion would be to miss one point of that work. It begins, often enough, with questions traditionally posed there but develops by putting pressure on both 'philosophy' and 'religion'. When thinking about spirituality, Charlesworth draws from anthropology as