The Many Definitions of Contemplative Prayer

When discussing the concept of Contemplative Prayer, sometimes called "the discipline of silence", the discussion many times leads to a question of what the term "Contemplative Prayer" actually is intended to mean. At one extreme, some will say that Contemplative Prayer is no more than trying to not think about the issues/concerns of the day in order to focus attention on God (i.e., not much different than regular prayer). And others will say that Contemplative Prayer is like regular prayer, except you are quiet and listen for an extended time in order to give God a chance to speak back to you, since they say prayer should be a two way conversation. At the other extreme, some will say that Contemplative Prayer is emptying the mind of all thought and emotion so that you can experience union with God directly, and that this practice, along with acts of service, can bring unity and peace between the world religions and people groups (as opposed to "belief systems" and "practices/rituals" which divide religions and people groups).

With such a wide variety of meanings infused into the term "Contemplative Prayer", I thought it might be helpful for discussion to compile a sampling of the meanings and expectations various leaders pour into the term. I will use Green to indicate definitions that I think are rational and in keeping with mainstream historical Christianity. I will use Red to indicate definitions that seem to be mystical and that are more in keeping with the practices of the mystics, either the ancient Catholic mystics or Hindu, Buddhist or other eastern mystics.

From a Google definition search (religioustolerance.org):
Contemplative prayer: This is an ancient Christian practice that was suppressed by the Roman Catholic Church during the Middle Ages and is rejected by many conservative Protestants today. It consists of a wordless form of prayer in which one simply exists in the presence of the Holy Spirit.

The definition from Wikipedia:
In Christian mysticism, Contemplative prayer can refer to:

• repetitive chanting, breathing in a controlled manner or silent concentration to quiet the thoughts and feelings and commune with a spirit that some believe to be God.
• infused contemplation: a divinely originated, general, non-conceptual, loving awareness of God; a pure and unmerited gift
• acquired contemplation: for which the believer could strive with the help of grace
• Centering prayer, which is sometimes called contemplative prayer, although "It is not contemplation in the strict sense, which in Catholic tradition has always been regarded as a pure gift of the Spirit, but rather it is a preparation for contemplation."

The Science of Spirituality's Definition:
They believe that Contemplative Prayer is the same practice, regardless of the religion a person holds:

Definitions from leading proponents of Contemplative Prayer

Please note: For those leaders who have Red in their quotes, let me say that I believe in every case their goals and motives are good. I understand the desire to try to find better ways of doing things than what is common in contemporary society. But I also believe that those methods and belief systems will, over the long term, cause a devaluing of rationality, truth and making distinctions, even more than the concept of "truth" is devalued in contemporary society today.

Thomas Merton:
"Contemplative consciousness is a trans-cultural, trans-religious, trans-formed consciousness … it can shine through this or that system, religious or irreligious" (Thoughts of the East, P34)

"It is a glorious destiny to be a member of the human race, ... now I realize what we all are .... If only they could all see themselves as they really are ...I suppose the big problem would be that we would fall down and worship each other ... At the center of our being is a point of nothingness which is untouched by sin and by illusions, a point of pure truth ... This little point ...is the pure glory of God in us. It is in everybody." (Conjectures of a Guilty Bystander, 1989 edition, P157-158)

"I see no contradiction between Buddhism and Christianity ... I intend to become as good a Buddhist as I can." (David Steindl-Rast, "Recollection of Thomas Merton's Last Days in the West", Monastic Studies, 7:10)

Richard Foster:
"Thomas Merton has perhaps done more than any other twentieth century figure to make the life of prayer widely known and understood" (Spiritual Classics, P17)

"There are those who feel that the Christian idea of meditation is synonymous with the concept of meditation centered in Eastern religion. In reality they stand worlds apart. Eastern meditation is an attempt to empty the mind; Christian meditation is an attempt to empty the mind in order to fill it" (Celebration of Discipline, 1st edition, 1978, P15)

"Christian meditation has nothing to do with emptying our minds"... "Contemplation goes beyond words and symbols and concepts to the reality the words and concepts describe...; Contrary to much current thinking, contemplation has nothing to do with making our minds blank or having honey-sweet thoughts. As we have observed, its chief aim is to encounter Christ..." (Spiritual Classics, P10, 13, Joyce Huggett, edited by Richard Foster)

Note that, just like when we sleep or when we are focused on one task, all mystics do fill the mind with something, whether they can recall the memory of their thoughts/emotions or not. So that is not the issue. The issue is whether we should be using our mind to think rationally, or whether we should be clearing our minds in an attempt to try to get away from rational thinking...

So, for example, here is one of the forms of Contemplative Prayer that Richard Foster has promoted :
"A fourth form of meditation has at its objective to bring you into a deep inner communion with the Father... In your imagination allow your spiritual body, shining with light, to rise out of your physical body. Look back so that you can see yourself lying in the grass and reassure your body that you will return momentarily... Listen quietly, anticipating the unanticipated. Note carefully any instruction given. With time and experience you will be able to distinguish readily between mere human thoughts that may bubble up to the conscious mind and the True Spirit which inwardly moves upon the heart." (Celebration of Discipline, 1st edition, 1978, P27)

Dallas Willard:
"Now because silence is such a radical thing and it does mean that you give up control of your situation, you can see what a tremendous impact that would have on the American church, in their services, in their meetings of various kinds. Suppose they practice silence in some of their meetings, that would actually give a place for God to break in... And you know that is the way God is, he more or less waits for us to get tired of running things then he is glad to help." (Be Still DVD)

"Genesis began as an oral tradition of narrative stories passed down from generation to generation….These stories [gradually] took on theological meaning….Over time [they] were written down and collected together (Gen 12-50), and a prologue (Gen 1-11) was added….Borrowing from other creation accounts…stories with parallels to ancient Near Eastern religious narrative and mythology were reshaped with monotheistic intent….These strands of varied materials were gathered and edited into the written text…" (Renovare Spiritual Formation Study Bible, Dallas Willard General Editor)

So, if the beginnings of the Bible were ancient polytheistic myths that were reshaped with monotheistic intent (rather than the polytheistic myths being an offshoot of accurate monotheistic history), then Christianity already has much in common with the eastern religions and the Bible may not be fully reliable. You can see why experiencing God directly might be considered by some as a more pure form of "knowing" God than studying the Bible.

Thomas Keating:
"[Contemplative Prayer]... is a process of inner transformation, a conversation initiated by God and leading, if we consent, to divine union. One’s way of seeing reality changes in the process. A restructuring of consciousness takes place which empowers one to perceive, relate and respond with increasing sensitivity to the divine presence in, through, and beyond everything that exists." (Open Mind, Open Heart, P4)

Father Thomas Keating describes "Centering Prayer" which, as defined earlier, is preparation for Contemplative Prayer:

Thomas Dubay:
Father Thomas Dubay has a 13 part video series called "Contemplation: Union with God" which has the most in depth discussion of Contemplative Prayer that I have found. His definition of contemplative prayer is as follows:

Contemplative Prayer is not:
1. a monastic exercise
2. a sterile intellectualism
3. inner introspection
4. an impersonal state
5. exalting in nature
6. visions and revelations
7. strong emotional feelings about God
8. thinking about Biblical concepts (discursive meditation)

Contemplative Prayer is:
1. being alone with the supreme Alone in a wordless presence to Him
2. meeting in mystery with the hidden God, listening to the silent word of God speaking in us
3. an experience of the indwelling Trinity
4. a knowing, loving immersion in the divine beauty of God
5. a waiting and thirsting for God
6. simply living the greatest of all the commandments
7. a divine invasion, the infinite enters our timed existence
8. reliving Jesus prayer in solitude
9. being quenched at the fountain
10. a small gentle transformation into the divine likeness, by seeing God as he really is
11. the beginning of eternal life here on earth

Contemplative Bible Reading... Small Group Discussion Guide by NavPress (The Navigators):
"Your aim is to let go of issues and agendas that occupy your thoughts and move your mind instead to God... The important thing is that your spine is straight... It is most important to relax the muscles in your throat... Slow down your breathing... praying the first phrase as your breathe in, praying the second phrase as you breathe out... Pray also that as you open yourself to the spiritual world that you will be protected from evil... Focus on God: you can do this by means of an image such as meeting God on the road and talking to him. As you inhale pray "Lord Jesus Christ" and as you exhale pray "Have Mercy". It may be helpful for you to find the right place. There is something about "sacred space"."

Summary:
So, it does seem that there is more than one meaning being used for this term, Contemplative Prayer. In fact, with the wide variety of meanings there seems to be something here for people who come at this subject from almost any perspective.

If you are concerned about Christians you know who never seem to grow out of their problems and you want a new "reformation" of discipline in the Christian church, but you don't want to focus on the Bible passages that point out people's "sins" and tells them that they need to change, then instead you can teach them Contemplative Prayer and hope that experiences during that practice will motivate them toward change.

If you think this is a strange practice and have never heard of the Contemplative Prayer movement until now, then you don't have to worry about doing anything, at least until this teaching comes to your doorstep (as it came to mine)...

If you are wanting to do something to make yourself feel more "spiritual" but you don't want to go into Eastern meditation, you can use the milder, more orthodox definitions of the term. Then later, when you are ready, you have the option to start changing your thinking to use the "deeper meanings" of the same term.

If you think there is nothing wrong with Christians using meditation practices from other religions and are wondering what all the fuss in about, Contemplative Prayer will finally give your beliefs and practices more respectability within evangelical Christianity.

If you are someone who places a higher value on truth than peace and you are eager for a battle where you will be an outsider and an underdog (like the reformers in the decades around the reformation), this is one good opportunity that can keep you busy.

If you want to insure that peace and harmony are maintained (in opposition to those previous people who place a higher value on truth than peace), then you can support the more orthodox definitions of Contemplative Prayer and allow people to continue peacefully using the term Contemplative Prayer, with each person pouring in the meaning that they are most comfortable with. Most people will start out using the milder meanings in any case, so why bother to split hairs over the meaning of the term.

And finally, if you are a Hindu or Buddhist who has felt that Christianity has devalued what your faith has to offer, this practice of Contemplative Prayer should at very least bring an understanding and appreciation of the meditation practices that have been categorically rejected by Protestant Christianity in the past. One of the major walls between Protestant Christianity and Hindu or Buddhist practices may finally be removed.

So, by having multiple meanings for the same term, the practice of Contemplative Prayer can make itself attractive to a large section of society. But since this post is about defining our terms, here is one more definition you may want to understand:

Obfuscation: To be evasive, unclear or confusing; mystification; intending to conceal the truth by confusion

Understanding Paul Through Speed Limits

One of the key concepts required to understand the Christian belief system is what Paul was trying to communicate concerning Christianity and it's relationship to law. A good modern day analogy to help illustrate what Paul was saying might be helpful: the concept of speed limits.

The Problems with Speed Limits
Speed limits are good. They save lives. But focusing only on the speed limits themselves misses the point and can be a substitute for actually doing our greater duty as citizens, causing us to act inappropriately at times.

Also, in order to receive your drivers license you likely had to sign a document saying that you would obey all traffic laws, including the speed limits, at all times. Yet, many times you have broken that promise by going one or two miles an hour above the speed limit. So, rightfully you have violated your agreement and you should go to the DMV and turn in your license. Just because you have not been stopped by the police does not nullify the fact that you are a law breaker and deserve jail or at least to have your license revoked.

Road planners study the best ways to decide how fast you should go. They weigh all the various issues and choose the appropriate maximum speed for the area, considering that you could crash and/or kill someone (including children). So, the speed limits are likely better information than you could come up with. But the speed limits are fixed for all times and all situations. They cannot reflect the nuances of weather, whether children are around or not, etc... So, the posted speed limits are never the most optimal speed. Sometimes you should be able to drive faster safely, and other times to be safe you should drive below the limit. So, at best, speed limits are a best average guess at what a good speed should be in most situations.

The Correct Attitude Toward Speed Limits
People have many different attitudes toward speed limits. Which one of these attitudes do you normally take?

1. I should do whatever it takes to never break the speed limit (normally driving significantly below the limit)
2. I should go below the limit but it is O.K. if I go over a little from time to time
3. I should go right at or just a little below the speed limit
4. I should go right at the speed limit as much as possible, not over but not normally below either
5. I can go right at or a little above the speed limit
6. I can go up to five miles above the speed limit (since police generally will not give tickets for that)
7. It is O.K. if go any speed as long as I don't get caught

Which one of these attitudes do you practice? Which one is the right answer? The right answer from the perspective of Paul is "none of the above".

Answer: Study the best ways to decide how fast you should go, weigh all the various issues and go the appropriate speed for the situation, considering that you could crash and/or kill someone (including children). Don't worry about getting a ticket, rather worry about doing what is best in all situations.

Note that this is a much higher standard than any of the seven options above. And it calls people to be more thoughtful and rational rather than blindly following standards. So, if you were shocked to understand that you were a law breaker before and deserved jail, now, even more shockingly, you find that you are supposed to live to an impossibly high standard. What hope do you have of meeting this higher standard if you couldn't even meet the simple speed limit standard?

The speed limits can be of great help to you in deciding what speed to go, since the road planners have already gone though the work of trying to determine the best speed. But we have already noted that the speed limit can only be a best guess and cannot be the best actual speed for every given situation.

Speed Limit Enforcement and Grace
The goal of the police is to get people to follow the rules in order to reduce problems to society. Speed enforcement is really only intended for those people who at some point want to break the speed limit. If they see that you actually intended to follow the rules, they will many time give you grace, unless your actions encourage others to break the rules. And they will generally not pull people over unless they are going five or more miles an hour above the speed limit.

But grace can be abused. On our highways many times it is socially acceptable, and even expected, to go well above the posted speed limit. And allowing society to accept law breaking in one area of life can cause the same thought processes to flow into other areas of life. A dilemma for road planners is whether to raise the speed limits, allowing a greater number of more severe wrecks, or should they lower the speed limits, causing the vast majority of people to break the law. One answer to that dilemma may be to keep the best speed limit but raise the penalties significantly. That would keep most people from breaking the law and it would keep down the number of severe wrecks.

Specific applications of the best attitudes towards speed limits
Analysis of some specific situations helps clarify this nuanced view of law.

What would the person do in an area where there are no speed limits? Some people would want to go much faster than posted limits, without thinking about how they might hurt other people.

What about an area where the speed limit seems too low? A good citizen will judge the risk and benefits of going against the speed limit. If they go above the speed limit they will willingly accept a ticket or jail time for that choice. Also, they will take into account that, even if they normally follow good practices concerning speed limits, they also need to take into account how they will be encouraging other, less conscientious people to break the speed limits when they should not do that. In these cases, it seems prudent, after doing what we can to get the speed limit changed, to accept and follow the speed limit as an example to others who may not understand the specific issues involved (and taking into account that you may be incorrect in your assessment of the speed limit being too low).

What about an area where the speed limit seems too high? A Christian will again in this case evaluate what should be the speed limit and if they should go lower they will do that. And just as they would work to get low speed limits raised, they should work to get speed limits that are too high lowered.

What about in emergencies, like when going to the hospital when someone is dying? If a life is in the balance then the driver needs to balance the benefits of getting to the hospital sooner with the risks of hurting others in getting there. If the risk is low and the benefits are high, then it seems morally acceptable to break the speed limit laws, though the driver should be willing to pay the ticket if they are pulled over.

What if you don't remember the speed limit? Sometimes I forget what the speed limit is. If I did not understand the first principles of what the speed should be, then I may not know how fast I should go. But if I understand the first principles, then I will be more likely to go a correct speed even if I do not remember what the speed limit actually is.

The Problem with Laws and Rules in general
The old testament, and governments in general, intend for people to understand the meaning of laws from first principles. The ten commandments are not the ten most important laws, but rather they are ten summarized categories of the other laws. Unfortunately, for some people the laws of the old testament (and the laws of their state) became the focus in and of themselves and the first principles behind the laws were sometimes neglected (Mat 23:23). Jesus and Paul affirm that law is good, but they point people back to the first principles behind the many laws (Mat 5:17-18, Rom 3:31).

It is true some laws are symbolic or may apply to a specific cultural situation but even the symbolic laws show us how important symbolism is to a culture. We should work to translate symbolic laws into appropriate symbolism for our culture today (such as laws against flag burning).

The Correct Attitude Toward Law and Rules in general
People have many different attitudes toward laws, and rules in general. Which one of these attitudes do you normally take:

1. I should do whatever it takes to never break a rule of any kind.
2. I should be careful to not break rules but it is O.K. if I break the rules from time to time
3. I should try to get away with as much as possible, with out breaking the actual rules themselves
4. I can break the rules that no one really cares too much about, as long as I try to keep the rules people care about
5. It is O.K. to break any rules as long as I don't get caught

In the old testament it at first seems that it was expected a person should obey laws at all costs, that was like answer number one. And in early Israel people did what is right in their own eyes (and that was not considered good) like answers 2 though 5.

So, which one of these attitudes do you practice? Which one is the right answer? The right answer from the perspective of Paul is "none of the above".

Answer: Study the the needs of society and decide what the best laws should be, weighing all the various issues and doing the appropriate thing in each situation, considering the effects you could have on others (including children). But since you may not have fully studied the issues and/or you may not fully know what is going on in a given area, laws are likely better information than you could come up with, so you should normally be happy to submit to a given law. Don't worry about getting punished for breaking the law, rather worry about doing what is best in all situations.

Note that this is a much higher standard than any of the five options above. And it calls people to be more thoughtful and rational rather than blindly following standards. So, if you were shocked to understand that you were a law breaker before and deserved punishment (like some of the wording in the old testament), now you are supposed to live to an impossibly higher standard. What hope to you have of meeting this higher standard if you couldn't even meet the simple standard of following the various laws?

Law and Rule Enforcement vs Grace
Is god, or governments for that matter, just waiting to pounce on us if we break the rules? No. They would rather us obey and hope for our reformation into people who will obey.

Is God, and governments for that matter, waiting to isolate us if we continually, willing want to do things that hurt others? Yes. While that is not their first choice, if we continually hurt others then at very least we need to be separated from society.

The new testament, and the goal of government in general, is like the person who is free to understand the situation, look at the laws, rules, etiquette, etc.. and then do the appropriate thing, which is almost always to follow the given law or rule. The problem with western society today is that many people interpret laws, rules, etiquette, etc.. to say that they are free to decide what we should do on their own, but without regard for either the rules or first principles.

The Christian view of laws and rules prepares us to live in a good society. If all people understand and strive to follow rules appropriately, that in and of itself would make a society much closer to being like Heaven...

Specific applications of the best attitudes towards laws and rules
Analysis of some specific situations helps clarify the Paul's' view of law.

What would the people do who lived when there was no laws written down? People would do what was right in their own eyes. That would be good only if they fully understood the first principles and were motivated to make an informed decision in each case. But normally that is not the case.

What about laws/rules that don't seem just? Normally a Christian should obey the laws but if a law is considered potentially unjust, then a Christian will judge the risk and benefits of going against the law. If they go against a particular law, then they must be willing to accept the punishment for disobeying that law. Also, they will take into account that, even if they normally try to do what is right, they also need to take into account how they will be encouraging other, less conscientious people to break the laws. In these cases it seems prudent, after doing what we can to get the law changed, to accept and follow the law as an example to others who may not understand the specific issues involved (and taking into account that you may be incorrect in your assessment of the law being unjust).

What about laws/rules that seem to be too permissive? A Christian will again in this case evaluate what should be the law and if they should go do more than the law requires then they will do that. And just as they would work to get an unjust law overturned, they should work to get laws that are too permissive to be more restrictive.

What about in emergencies, when it seems breaking laws may be a good thing to do? If a lives are in the balance then the person needs to balance the benefits of breaking a particular law with the risks of hurting others by breaking that law. If the risk is low and the benefits are high, then it seems acceptable to break a particular law, though the person should be willing to pay the price for breaking that particular law.

What about the good person who doesn't know the laws? All of us break some laws at times, but it our commitment to honestly try to follow the laws of the state that makes us a good citizen, not the fact that we actually attain perfection in following all the laws. But we do have a responsibility to know the state we are under and to know the laws that state requires. To expect to be a considered a good citizen while following the laws of a different state is no reasonable.

Billy Graham believes that good people from all religions go to Heaven. That is theoretically true, but the problem is the definition of who is "good". God considers a person "good" when they follow all of His laws appropriately. The problem we have seen is to really follow any given set of laws is an unattainably high standard. So, the "good" people from other religions that Billy Graham thinks should go to the Christian Heaven can not actually exist. If their religions are true, then perhaps they go to Nirvana, or whatever their religion believes happens after death. But if Christianity is true and they are not following the Christian God and His laws, then they cannot be considered part of Christian society, either before or after death.

How to understand Paul's attitude towards laws
Paul was well educated. He understood that many seeming dilemmas are caused by a lack of understanding of the first principles underlying the concepts of law and grace. So to resolve the perceived problems Paul points the reader back to first principles: love your neighbor. In doing that he is not nullifying the concept of law. On the contrary, he is fully supporting the concept of law.

Note that the same concepts apply to all the various forms of "law", including rules, best practices, etiquette, standards, etc.. All are different forms of the general concept of "law".

We should honor and be grateful for good laws, since they are the out workings of our caring for each other. We should work to change inappropriate laws, since they are not fulfilling their intended function. And we should strive to follow good laws, even when we can get away with not following them and/or when there is a personal cost involved with following a particular law.

We should break laws where necessary to follow higher first principles. But that should only be done in extreme circumstances where the letter of the law is not performing its intended function, and where breaking the law will not encourage others to break the laws when they should not.

Regardless of the correctness of our actions (such as rushing someone who is dying to the hospital), we should gladly accept law enforcement without expecting grace, because law makers many times are not able to make distinctions between when a law should be broken or when it should not be broken. To do so would make an unwieldy law (like the tax code...). Be grateful when grace is extended to you and do not use it as license to break the laws.

Teach your children and others the full concepts of law and grace and how they relate to each other. This is not an ancient or abstract concept, but one that can have a profound affect on how we live our lives.

New Health Craze Sweeps India

Scientific research has shown that antioxidants are extremely beneficial to health, possibly even helping prevent some forms of cancer. Wine has been found to be a significant source of antioxidants, as is unleavened bread. So many secondary schools and private Hindu colleges in India now offer a service to ensure that their students are able to take advantage of these health benefits in what is called "communion time". Some Hindu fundamentalists have objected saying that this is no more than western religion encroaching on their schools. But cooler heads have prevailed, with more moderate Hindus suggesting that students recite "do this in remembrance of Krishna" to ensure that this regimen is not at all related to Christianity.

We asked the Director of Nutrition at a leading private Hindu college whether he had concerns about this practice. From the email response: "I see no danger of our Hindu students becoming Christians. Besides I have been taking grape juice for years for the antioxidant benefits and I have no desire to become a Christian". It was unclear from the response why grape juice and bread was not just added to the lunch menu rather than being dispensed in communion time.

Reaction from a leading Christian college has been mixed. Some professors have seen this as an opportunity that will facilitate the evangelization of India. Others insist that "communion time" is a powerful spiritual discipline that, even though historically it has been associated with Christianity, can also be used by Hindu devotees to help in their spiritual formation. Still others insist there is no spiritual connection to the ritual itself, so it can be secularized and used by Hindus solely for the health benefits.

Respected Christian leader Dr. Tony Campolo was asked whether this might be common ground for the evangelization of Hindus. He said No it is not. "[But] ...if we are looking for common ground, can we find it in mystical spirituality, even if we cannot theologically agree?". We also asked evangelist Rev. Billy Graham what impact this could have on the future of the evangelism in India. Rev. Graham said "[Some good Hindus] ...may not even know the name of Jesus but they know in their heart that they need something that they don't have and they turn to the only light that they have and I think that they are saved and they are going to be with us in Heaven".

We asked a spokesman from a leading Christian graduate school whether the Bible would commend the use of communion by other religions. The spokesman said "from my contemplative meditation and Lectio Divina, I feel that God is saying to me, even though this may look like a western religious practice, when Hindus do communion time it is purely a Hindu practice having nothing at all to do with Christianity. Besides, many conservative Christian leaders have been blessed by using eastern spiritual techniques for years. It is about time that we return the favor".