Contemplation and Contemplative Prayer: Distinguishing Their Forms, Contents, Degrees and Daily Practice

A Theological and Historical Study with Particular Reference to St Ignatius of Loyola, St Teresa of Ávila, St John of the Cross and the Early Society of Jesus

Jean Khoury

Summary: The word “contemplation” is employed in Christian spiritual theology to describe several realities which, although related, must not be confused. It can refer to the attentive consideration of a biblical scene, the prayerful penetration of a mystery of faith, an illumination received from the Holy Spirit, or the profound, infused and transforming communication of God described by the great mystical doctors. Furthermore, “contemplative prayer” can designate a regular exercise of mental prayer, undertaken for a determined period each day, without necessarily implying that the person praying is experiencing contemplation in the stricter mystical sense.

This article proposes a clarification of these different meanings by distinguishing the object, form, degree and practical exercise of contemplation. It examines the imaginative contemplation proposed in the Spiritual Exercises of St Ignatius, the contemplation of revealed mysteries described by St Thomas Aquinas and Réginald Garrigou-Lagrange, and the mystical contemplation taught by St Teresa of Ávila and St John of the Cross.

Particular attention is devoted to the distinction between contemplation as an experience and contemplative prayer as an institutionally established daily exercise. The original constitutions of the Society of Jesus are compared with the legislation of Teresian Carmel and the Franciscan reforms. It is shown that, although St Ignatius was himself a mystic and his Spiritual Exercises contain numerous contemplations, he did not impose a universally prescribed period of mental prayer upon fully formed Jesuits. This was introduced subsequently, particularly through the legislation of St Francis Borgia in 1565.

The article concludes by considering the theological and practical consequences of these distinctions for spiritual formation, spiritual direction and the organisation of Christian life.

Introduction

Few terms in Christian spiritual theology are employed as frequently, and with such a diversity of meanings, as the word “contemplation”. The same word is used to describe the contemplation of a Gospel scene, a deep understanding of a mystery of faith, an experience of God’s presence, an intellectual illumination, a wordless loving attention to God, or the profound mystical union described by St John of the Cross.

This plurality of meanings is not necessarily a difficulty. The Christian tradition has developed a rich vocabulary of contemplation, reflecting different dimensions of the human person’s encounter with God. The problem arises when distinct realities are confused simply because they bear the same name.

A person may speak of contemplating the Nativity, another of contemplating the mystery of the Trinity, and a third of receiving the infused contemplation described by St John of the Cross. Are these three persons speaking of the same spiritual operation? Are they describing different objects of a single activity, different modes of prayer, or different degrees of the action of the Holy Spirit?

An additional question arises when we move from the theology of contemplation to the practical organisation of spiritual life. Religious communities frequently prescribe a daily period of mental prayer. They may call this period “contemplative prayer”, “mental prayer”, “meditation”, “recollection” or simply “prayer”. Yet the existence of such a period tells us very little, by itself, about the particular form or degree of contemplation experienced by the person praying.

This distinction becomes particularly important when we compare the original structure of the Society of Jesus with the reformed Carmelite and Franciscan traditions of the sixteenth century.

St Ignatius of Loyola undoubtedly experienced profound mystical graces. His Spiritual Exercises contain a carefully developed pedagogy of meditation and contemplation. Nevertheless, the original legislation of the Society did not prescribe for every fully formed Jesuit a fixed daily period of mental prayer comparable to the two hours established by St Teresa for her nuns or the three hours required in the reform associated with St Peter of Alcántara.

The question is not whether St Ignatius knew contemplation, nor whether Jesuits could become contemplatives. It concerns a more precise historical and theological issue: the distinction between the presence of contemplation within a spiritual tradition and the institutional provision of a specific daily exercise devoted to personal prayer.

To understand this issue adequately, it is necessary first to clarify the meaning of contemplation itself.

I. The Necessary Preliminary Distinctions

1. Contemplation does not designate a single spiritual operation

In its broadest sense, contemplation denotes an attentive and sustained regard directed towards a reality, particularly one worthy of admiration, love or profound understanding.

Within Christian theology, the object of this regard is ultimately God, either considered in himself or approached through his revelation, his works, the mysteries of salvation and the person of Jesus Christ.

St Thomas Aquinas offers an important classical distinction between meditation and contemplation. In the Summa Theologiae, he explains that meditation involves the movement of reason towards the discovery of truth, whereas contemplation concerns a simpler act of beholding a truth already apprehended. He writes that “contemplation regards the simple act of gazing on the truth”.[1]

This distinction introduces a fundamental principle: contemplation need not be identified with a particular technique of prayer. It is a mode of attending to a reality, and it can assume different forms according to the object contemplated, the faculties involved and the manner in which God acts upon the person.

It is therefore useful to distinguish several questions.

The first concerns the object of contemplation. What is being contemplated? A scene from the Gospel, a revealed mystery, a divine attribute, the presence of Christ, or God himself beyond every particular representation?

The second concerns its form. How does contemplation take place? Through the imagination, the intellect, a simple act of faith, an affective movement of love, or an interior and profound reception of God’s action?

The third concerns its degree. To what extent is the person acting through ordinary spiritual faculties, assisted by grace, and to what extent is the Holy Spirit acting directly, introducing the person into a deeper, infused contemplation?

The fourth concerns its practical exercise. Is contemplation occurring spontaneously, within a period of meditation, during theological study, in the course of apostolic activity, or during a time expressly reserved for personal prayer?

These distinctions are complementary. Confusing them is one of the principal causes of ambiguity in the terminology of spiritual theology.

2. Mental prayer and contemplative prayer are not necessarily identical with mystical contemplation

Mental prayer, traditionally called oración mental in Spanish or oraison mentale in French, designates prayer undertaken interiorly, principally through the exercise of the mind and heart, rather than through the external recitation of prescribed formulas.

In its broad historical usage, mental prayer can include discursive meditation, affective prayer, recollection, simple loving attention and, when God grants it, infused contemplation.

Consequently, the expression “mental prayer” does not describe a single, unchanging mode of interior activity. Rather, it names a broad family of interior exercises that can develop considerably during the spiritual journey.

The term “contemplative prayer” introduces an additional ambiguity.

Sometimes it is employed in a strict theological sense, referring to a simple, loving, receptive prayer in which God increasingly takes the initiative. At other times it is employed more broadly to designate the regular exercise of interior prayer, particularly within a religious community.

This broader understanding is especially relevant when speaking of a daily horarium.

For the purposes of the present study, “contemplative prayer” will principally designate a dedicated period of personal, interior prayer, intended to foster a sustained relationship with God and to remain open to the various forms of contemplation that God may grant.

This is a practical and institutional use of the expression. It must not be confused with a claim that the person necessarily experiences infused contemplation during that period.

The distinction is particularly important because a community can establish the exercise of mental prayer through legislation. It cannot legislate the supernatural experience of contemplation.

3. What the Church’s Catechism contributes to this distinction

The Catechism of the Catholic Church distinguishes vocal prayer, meditation and contemplative prayer, while presenting them as expressions of the one Christian life of prayer.[2]

When discussing contemplative prayer, the Catechism cites St Teresa’s celebrated definition of oración mental: “taking time frequently to be alone with him who we know loves us”.

This definition is particularly revealing. Teresa does not begin by describing a mystical state, an extraordinary illumination or the suspension of the faculties. She describes an encounter, a relationship, and the deliberate decision to reserve time for that relationship.

Moreover, the Catechism explicitly recognises that meditation can still take place within contemplative prayer. The decisive feature is the orientation of the person towards God, not the exclusion of every intellectual operation.

At the same time, the Catechism describes contemplative prayer as a gift, thereby reminding us that even our most deliberate prayer depends upon the initiative and grace of God.

The distinction, therefore, cannot be reduced to a simplistic opposition between an activity performed by the person and an experience produced by God. All authentic Christian prayer is assisted by grace. Nevertheless, a distinction remains between an exercise that can be undertaken voluntarily and a particular contemplative grace that cannot be produced at will.

II. St Ignatius of Loyola and Contemplation in the Spiritual Exercises

1. Contemplation as an organised spiritual exercise

The Spiritual Exercises of St Ignatius offer one of the most influential presentations of meditation and contemplation in the history of Christian spirituality.

In the First Annotation, Ignatius includes within the expression “Spiritual Exercises” the various ways of examining conscience, meditating, contemplating, praying vocally and mentally, and undertaking other spiritual activities.[3]

This definition is already significant. Contemplation appears as one of several forms of spiritual exercise. It is not presented as the exclusive or exhaustive meaning of prayer.

The Exercises are designed to help a person become free from disordered attachments and seek the will of God. Their purpose is therefore practical and transformative. Through prayer, discernment and conversion, the person becomes capable of following Christ more faithfully.

Within this broader itinerary, contemplation assumes a particular importance, especially during the Second, Third and Fourth Weeks, when the person is invited to contemplate the mysteries of Christ’s life, Passion and Resurrection.

2. Imaginative contemplation of the Gospel

One characteristic form of Ignatian contemplation involves the use of the imagination.

Ignatius invites the person to enter imaginatively into a Gospel scene, to become attentive to the persons present, to what they say and to what they do.

The contemplation of the Nativity, for example, invites the person to consider the journey to Bethlehem, the surroundings in which Jesus is born, the people present and the circumstances of the event.

The imagination serves the act of prayer by making the Gospel scene present to the interior attention of the person.

This imaginative activity must not be mistaken for an attempt to reconstruct the historical event with perfect accuracy. Its purpose is spiritual participation in the mystery, through faith, in order to know, love and follow Jesus.

The intellectual and affective faculties are engaged. The person may receive an insight, experience a movement of love, recognise a truth or discover a call to conversion.

Ignatius himself recognises the possibility of a particular divine illumination during this process. In the Second Annotation, he explains that the person can arrive at a deeper understanding of the mystery through personal reflection or through the enlightenment of the intellect by divine power.

He therefore does not reduce contemplation to an exercise of imagination alone.

The imagination provides an important means of access to the mystery, but the spiritual fruit may come through an action of grace exceeding what the person could discover independently.

3. Contemplation and the reception of spiritual light

An essential distinction must now be introduced.

The contemplation proposed by Ignatius is an exercise that the person can undertake deliberately. Nevertheless, during that exercise, the Holy Spirit may intervene and communicate a light that is not simply the result of human reasoning.

There is therefore a difference between the method employed and the grace received.

The method may consist in contemplating a biblical event. The grace may consist in receiving a new understanding of Christ, recognising a divine invitation, or experiencing a profound movement of love.

The content and depth of the grace cannot be deduced simply from the method being used.

A beginner may undertake the same contemplation of the Nativity as a spiritually advanced person. The external form of the exercise may be identical, while the interior action of grace may differ considerably.

This illustrates the importance of distinguishing the form of contemplation from its degree.

4. The contemplative experience of St Ignatius himself

It would be seriously mistaken to conclude that St Ignatius’s personal contemplative experience was limited to the imaginative method described in the Spiritual Exercises.

His experience at the river Cardoner, recorded in his Autobiography, and the profound graces described in his Spiritual Diary reveal an interior life of exceptional mystical depth.

The Spiritual Diary, particularly its entries concerning the Trinity and the celebration of Mass in 1544–1545, gives evidence of forms of prayer that cannot adequately be explained as imaginative contemplation of Gospel scenes.[4]

Consequently, a necessary distinction must be maintained between St Ignatius’s personal mystical experience and the particular methods he proposed for guiding others.

A mystic may experience forms of contemplation that exceed the specific method he teaches. Likewise, a founder may establish a particular institutional organisation without requiring every member of his community to reproduce the precise circumstances of his own prayer.

This distinction becomes decisive when examining the structure of the early Society of Jesus.

Note 1: Many Jesuits with extensive experience in directing the Spiritual Exercises do not insist that the exercitant practise imaginative contemplation. They take two considerations into account: first, some individuals may simply be unable to use their imagination in this way; secondly, there comes a stage in spiritual growth when the exercitant moves beyond the use of imagination towards a quieter and simpler form of prayer.

In this regard, see St. John of the Cross’s teaching on the transition from discursive meditation to a quieter, supernatural form of contemplation. This distinction does not, however, imply that imaginative contemplation cannot involve a supernatural intervention of God or an authentic experience of contemplation. Rather, it concerns different grades and modes of contemplation, and the transition from one to another as the spiritual life develops.

Note 2: Since Lectio Divina has become increasingly popular today, it is important to clarify the particular form of contemplation associated with it. It is highly advisable to classify this form of contemplation alongside the Ignatian form, since both involve engaging with Scripture and attending to what Jesus is saying. Indeed, the Spiritual Exercises draw extensively upon Scripture, just as Lectio Divina does. In both cases, contemplation is closely connected with the Word of God and with the effort to perceive and receive what Christ is communicating through it.

III. Contemplating the Mysteries of Faith: St Thomas Aquinas and Garrigou-Lagrange

1. The contemplation of revealed truth

A different, although related, understanding of contemplation appears in the theological tradition associated with St Thomas Aquinas.

In this tradition, contemplation can designate the intellect’s sustained attention to divine truth. It is not necessarily concerned with the imaginative reconstruction of an event, but with the penetration and understanding of a revealed reality.

One may contemplate the Trinity, the Incarnation, the divine indwelling, the mystery of grace, the Redemption, the Eucharist or the relationship between Christ and his Church.

The immediate object is not necessarily a scene, but a mystery.

The intellect seeks to understand more profoundly what God has revealed. It considers the truth, recognises its inner coherence and progressively enters into a deeper appreciation of its significance.

This contemplation may involve theological reasoning, but it is not reducible to reasoning. The intellect can pass from analysis to a simpler, more unified perception of the mystery.

Moreover, the action of the Holy Spirit may introduce a supernatural illumination that exceeds ordinary theological investigation.

2. Garrigou-Lagrange and the infused contemplation of the mysteries of faith

Fr Réginald Garrigou-Lagrange, O.P., develops this understanding within his theology of the spiritual life. For him, contemplation of the mysteries of faith can assume a genuinely infused character. Through the gifts of the Holy Spirit, particularly understanding and wisdom, the believer receives a deeper, living penetration of revealed truth. Garrigou-Lagrange discusses this explicitly in The Three Ways of the Spiritual Life, particularly in his treatment of the infused contemplation of the mysteries of faith.[5]

The essential point is that the contemplation of a doctrinal mystery is not necessarily an exclusively human intellectual activity. The Holy Spirit may enlighten the intellect, allowing the person to perceive something of the depth and significance of the mystery. This may happen, for instance, when a person studying the Incarnation suddenly receives a profound light concerning the humility of the Son of God, or when contemplation of the Cross produces a new understanding of divine love. Such an illumination can exceed the conclusions attained through rational deduction. Nevertheless, it remains connected with a determinate theological content.

This introduces a further distinction: the fact that contemplation is infused does not necessarily mean that it has ceased to concern a particular mystery of faith. Indeed, Garrigou-Lagrange explicitly speaks of infused contemplation of revealed mysteries. He also distinguishes contemplation directly concerned with these mysteries from contemplation concerned with their practical consequences in the Christian life. This is an important qualification when comparing his teaching with that of St John of the Cross.

3. Theological contemplation and mystical contemplation

In the theological contemplation associated with Aquinas and Garrigou-Lagrange, the intellect retains an important role. The person may receive an illumination concerning a truth that can, at least partially, be articulated and communicated. The contemplation has a recognisable doctrinal content. By contrast, in the deeper mystical contemplation described by St John of the Cross, the divine communication is often experienced beyond the ordinary operations of conceptual understanding. These two realities should not be identified merely because both can involve the action of the Holy Spirit. At the same time, they should not be considered mutually exclusive. The Holy Spirit can illuminate the intellect concerning a revealed mystery while also drawing the person into a deeper transformation of love.

The question is therefore not whether one form is supernatural and the other natural. The more precise question concerns the manner in which supernatural grace acts, the faculties principally engaged and the depth at which the divine communication takes place. This distinction has been developed more extensively in the study The Grammar of Christian Contemplation: Forms and Degrees from Dionysius to St John of the Cross.[6]

IV. St John of the Cross: Contemplation Beyond Discursive Meditation

1. A different mode of divine communication

St John of the Cross describes contemplation in terms that differ substantially from the deliberate meditation of a Gospel scene or the intellectual consideration of a revealed mystery. For him, contemplation is fundamentally a communication of God to the soul, received in faith and love. It is not necessarily mediated through images, particular considerations or successive acts of reasoning. Also, it occurs in our spirit (the tip of the soul) and not in the soul (see Ascent of Mount Carmel Book II, chapter 29 where he distinguishes what falls in the soul (conscious mind) and what falls in the spirit).

In the Ascent of Mount Carmel, Book II, chapter 13, he describes the passage from meditation to contemplation, particularly when the person begins to experience a general and loving attention to God. The person no longer finds it fruitful to move from one consideration to another. Instead, there emerges a simple, peaceful and loving attention in which the soul is increasingly receptive to God. John describes this disposition as waiting “with loving attentiveness upon God”.[7] This is not a rejection of the intellect, nor an attempt to produce a psychological state of emptiness. It is a change in the manner of knowing and loving God: it occurs essentially in our spirit. The divine action becomes more immediate, while the ordinary discursive operations of the faculties cease to constitute the principal means of prayer. (very important)

2. Infused contemplation and the initiative of God

In the Dark Night, St John explains that the deeper purifications of the spiritual journey are accomplished through a particular action of God. Infused contemplation is not simply a more efficient form of meditation. It involves a divine communication that transforms the person. This contemplation may be experienced as light, peace and love. At other times it is experienced as darkness, dryness and purification. The same divine action which draws the soul towards union also purifies it of attachments, imperfect ways of knowing God and spiritual self-reliance. The darkness is not necessarily the absence of divine action. It may indicate that God is communicating himself in a manner that the ordinary faculties cannot adequately grasp.

This helps explain why mystical contemplation cannot be evaluated by the amount of intellectual insight or sensible consolation experienced during prayer. A person may emerge from prayer without having received any particular thought or identifiable illumination (which is normal), yet may have been profoundly touched and transformed by grace. Conversely, a striking intellectual insight or a powerful emotional experience does not, by itself, prove that the person has entered into the infused contemplation described by St John.

3. The transition from meditation to contemplation

St John is particularly concerned with the discernment of the passage from discursive meditation to contemplation.

In the Ascent of Mount Carmel, Book II, chapter 13, he identifies three signs which must be considered together before a person abandons the former manner of prayer.

The essential question is whether the difficulty in continuing meditation arises from genuine spiritual progress and the action of God, or from distraction, negligence, discouragement or some other cause.

The person who is genuinely being introduced into contemplation discovers a new mode of loving attention to God, even when discursive meditation has become difficult.

This requires discernment.

It would be a mistake to encourage someone to abandon meditation merely because they find it tiring or because they believe that silence is necessarily superior to intellectual activity.

Equally, it would be a mistake to oblige someone who is genuinely being led into simple contemplation to continue multiplying thoughts, images and considerations as though such activity were always indispensable.

The transition must be understood according to the actual action of grace in the person.

4. Different Degrees and Purity of Contemplation According to Spiritual Growth

A further distinction of considerable theological importance must be introduced. St. John of the Cross does not present contemplation as one uniform experience, possessing the same characteristics throughout the spiritual journey. On the contrary, contemplation follows the progressive growth and purification of the person. We may therefore speak not only of different degrees of contemplation, but also, more precisely, of different degrees of purity in the manner in which divine contemplation is received. The contemplation experienced at the beginning of the mystical life is not identical, in its mode of reception, with the more purified contemplation received after the passive night of the spirit.

At the beginning of the spiritual journey, God adapts his communication to the weakness and limitations of the person. St. John illustrates this divine pedagogy through the image of a loving mother nourishing her child with milk (Dark Night, I.1.2). God comes down, so to speak, to our level and speaks our language, the language of a human nature still deeply marked by the limitations and attachments of the old man. The person is not yet capable of receiving the divine communication in its greater purity. Consequently, God initially communicates his grace through forms adapted to the person’s present condition, including sensible consolations, spiritual sweetness and the satisfaction experienced through prayer and other spiritual exercises. This is what St. John calls “spiritual milk”. Strictly speaking, these initial consolations should not all be identified with infused contemplation; rather, they illustrate the principle of divine accommodation which continues to operate during the earlier stages of contemplative life.

When the person begins to receive infused contemplation, particularly through the passive purification of the senses, God’s communication gradually becomes more spiritual. Nevertheless, even after this first purification, the person has not yet attained a sufficiently pure mode of reception. St. John explains this explicitly at the beginning of Book II of the Dark Night. Those who have reached the state of proficients can experience a serene and loving contemplation without the labour of discursive meditation. Yet this contemplation still has repercussions in the sensitive part of the person. Spiritual sweetness may overflow into the senses, and the body itself can be affected by the intensity of the divine communication. St. John explains that these communications cannot yet possess the strength and purity required for divine union, because the sensitive nature remains insufficiently purified (Dark Night, II.1.1–2).

This observation is fundamental. A contemplation may be genuinely infused, and therefore supernatural in its origin, while remaining imperfect in the manner in which it is received. The divine communication is authentic, but the person still receives it according to a mode accommodated to human weakness (human modality). The distinction is therefore not simply between acquired and infused contemplation. There is also a distinction within infused contemplation itself, according to the degree of purification and the capacity of the person to receive God’s action.

The decisive transformation occurs through the passive night of the spirit. Here God undertakes a much deeper purification, reaching the roots of the person’s habitual ways of knowing, loving and experiencing him. Through this purification, the intellect, memory and will are progressively freed from their imperfect modes of operation and from their dependence upon particular apprehensions. The person is thus made capable of receiving a divine communication that is increasingly pure, no longer requiring the sensible and psychological manifestations characteristic of earlier stages. St John explains that this contemplation is an infused divine wisdom which simultaneously purifies and illuminates the soul, preparing it for union with God (Dark Night, II.5.1–5).

We may therefore describe this development as a passage from a contemplation received according to a humanly accommodated modality towards a contemplation received in an increasingly divine modality. This does not mean that earlier contemplation is merely human or that later contemplation ceases to be received by a human person. The contemplation remains supernatural throughout; what changes is the degree to which the person has been purified and transformed, so as to receive God’s communication according to a more spiritual and less sensible mode. The culmination of this purification is a contemplation in which there may be nothing particular for the intellect to see, grasp or formulate. Yet this absence of distinct apprehensions does not mean that nothing is being communicated. On the contrary, God’s action may be more profound precisely because it transcends the person’s ordinary ways of knowing.

Consequently, it is insufficient to say simply that St John of the Cross teaches infused contemplation, as though this expression designated one single degree or quality of contemplative experience. His doctrine requires us to distinguish the different stages of contemplation, their degree of purity, their relationship with the sensible faculties and the progressive transformation accomplished through the two passive nights. This distinction is essential not only for understanding St John accurately, but also for comparing his teaching with other forms of contemplation, particularly those concerned with the imaginative contemplation of Gospel scenes or the infused understanding of the mysteries of faith.

References

St John of the Cross, Dark Night, I.1.2–3, concerning the image of the mother nourishing her child and the initial consolations of beginners; I.9.1–8, concerning the beginnings of infused contemplation and the purification of the senses; II.1.1–3, particularly the distinction between contemplation still overflowing into the senses and the more purely spiritual communication received after the second night; II.5.1–5, concerning infused contemplation as the divine wisdom which purifies and illuminates the soul.

See also St John of the Cross, Ascent of Mount Carmel, II.13–15, concerning the transition from meditation to contemplation, and Dark Night, II.9, concerning the purification of the faculties in preparation for divine union.

5. Is mystical contemplation detached from the mysteries of faith?

A particularly delicate question arises here. If the contemplation described by St John transcends images and discursive thought, does this mean that it is detached from Christ, Scripture or the mysteries of faith? Certainly not.

The distinction concerns the mode of divine communication and where it is communicated to us, not the abandonment of Christian revelation or Christ human nature (see what St. Teresa of Avila says about it, and what St. John of the Cross says about it in Ascent of Mount Carmel, Book II, chapter 22 when he makes God the Father speak).

The person remains united to Christ through faith, hope and charity. Indeed, the purpose of the spiritual journey is an ever-deeper participation in his life.

Nevertheless, the immediate experience of prayer need not consist in consciously considering a particular biblical scene or theological proposition. It occurs above consciousness or perception, in our spirit. He often quotes Dionysius the Pseudo Areopagite who mentions this also: beyond the sense and beyond the conscious mind).

This is an essential difference between contemplating a mystery through the deliberate exercise of one’s faculties and receiving a deeper, more hidden communication from God.

It is equally important to recall St Teresa’s insistence that the humanity of Christ must never be deliberately rejected as though it were an obstacle to mystical union. She addresses this question forcefully in chapter 22 of her Life and again in the Sixth Mansions, chapter 7.[8]

The movement beyond discursive meditation must therefore not be confused with a movement beyond Christ.

On the contrary, deeper contemplation is a more profound participation in the mystery of Christ, even when that participation is not accompanied by a conscious representation of his earthly life.

V. St Teresa of Ávila: Mental Prayer as a Regular Exercise and Contemplation as Grace

1. The importance of the daily exercise

St Teresa of Ávila offers a particularly illuminating example of the distinction between the regular exercise of mental prayer and the contemplation that God may grant within it.

For Teresa, mental prayer is fundamentally relational.

Her well-known definition in Life 8.5 presents it as an intimate relationship of friendship with God, sustained through the deliberate practice of spending time alone with him.

This relational understanding is fundamental to her spiritual teaching.

The purpose of mental prayer is not to produce extraordinary experiences. It is to deepen the person’s relationship with Christ, allowing love to grow and opening the entire life to the transforming action of grace.

Mental prayer may begin with meditation, reading, consideration of the life of Jesus or affective conversation with him.

As the spiritual journey advances, the form of prayer may change.

Teresa describes various degrees of recollection, the prayer of quiet, the prayer of union and the successive transformations of the spiritual life.

Nevertheless, the regular exercise of prayer remains important throughout.

2. The two daily hours of prayer in Teresian Carmel

The institutional importance of mental prayer becomes particularly clear in St Teresa’s Constitutions.

In the constitutional text associated with 1567, she establishes a daily morning period of prayer lasting one hour.

The sisters are to rise at five in the summer and remain in prayer until six, and at six in the winter and remain in prayer until seven.

She also provides for another hour of prayer before Matins, allowing spiritual reading during this period when it better assists recollection.[9]

Thus, two daily periods of prayer are integrated into the ordinary structure of religious life.

This was not simply a recommendation to cultivate a contemplative attitude throughout the day.

It was a concrete institutional provision.

A definite time was reserved, and the community’s daily rhythm was organised accordingly.

The significance of this legislation must be carefully understood.

Teresa was not prescribing two hours of infused contemplation. Such a prescription would be theologically impossible.

She was prescribing two hours devoted to the exercise of mental prayer, within which the sisters could meditate, converse with Christ, practise recollection or receive whatever contemplative grace God might grant them.

The exercise was obligatory within the community’s discipline; the mystical experience remained a gift.

3. The development of prayer and the transformation of the person

Teresa’s genius lies partly in her ability to maintain both dimensions together.

On the one hand, the person is called to fidelity, perseverance and regularity in prayer.

On the other hand, genuine spiritual growth eventually requires the person to receive forms of divine action that cannot be produced through the ordinary activity of the faculties.

The successive mansions of the Interior Castle reveal that the spiritual journey involves real transformations in the person’s relationship with God.

The transition from the Third to the Fourth Mansions is particularly significant because Teresa begins to describe forms of prayer in which the initiative of God becomes more directly apparent.

The person does not simply meditate more skilfully. A different mode of divine action begins to manifest itself.

Consequently, the daily exercise of mental prayer and the progressive experience of contemplation belong to two different, though intimately connected, dimensions of the spiritual life.

The exercise provides a regular occasion for prayer and faithful availability to God. The successive graces of contemplation belong to the mystery of God’s transforming action.

VI. The Franciscan Reforms: The Institutional Place of Mental Prayer

The Franciscan reforms of the sixteenth century provide another important historical comparison.

These reforms differed among themselves, and it would be inaccurate to speak of a single, universally adopted Franciscan horarium. Nevertheless, several reforming movements gave a prominent and explicitly regulated place to mental prayer.

The Capuchin Constitutions of 1536 prescribed at least two hours of prayer, emphasising that interior prayer was indispensable to the spiritual life of the friars.[10]

This legislation is particularly significant because the Capuchins did not simply reject apostolic ministry. Rather, they sought to organise religious life in such a way that the contemplative dimension would sustain and govern apostolic activity.

An even more striking example appears in the reform associated with St Peter of Alcántara.

The Ordinances of 1562, as documented by Franciscan historical scholarship, established three hours of daily mental prayer.[11]

Here again, the significance lies in the institutional decision to reserve a substantial part of the day for interior prayer.

The friars were not expected to experience infused contemplation continuously during these hours. The legislation concerned the regular exercise of prayer, not the supernatural degree of contemplation attained by each member.

The contrast with the original Society of Jesus is therefore substantial.

Within the reformed Carmelite and these Franciscan traditions, the dedicated exercise of mental prayer became a prominent structural element of religious life.

The founder or reformer did not merely encourage a contemplative spirit. He or she established concrete conditions, protected by the community’s discipline, in which personal prayer could be cultivated daily.

This is precisely the distinction which becomes decisive when examining the original Jesuit Constitutions.

VII. St. Ignatius and the Original Structure of the Society of Jesus

1. The founder’s personal contemplation and his institutional legislation

To investigate the original spiritual structure of the Society of Jesus, one must distinguish three realities. The first is the personal spiritual experience of St Ignatius, including his mystical graces. The second is the pedagogy of the Spiritual Exercises, which includes several forms of meditation and contemplation. The third is the daily pattern of religious life established in the Constitutions. These realities are related, but they are not identical. The fact that Ignatius experienced profound contemplation does not demonstrate that he prescribed lengthy periods of contemplative prayer for his companions.

Likewise, the fact that the Spiritual Exercises contain numerous contemplations does not mean that the ordinary life of the Society was intended to reproduce the intensive prayer schedule of a retreat.

The proper historical question is therefore: What did Ignatius actually prescribe for the daily prayer of Jesuits?

2. The distinction between scholastics and fully formed Jesuits

The answer requires attention to the different stages of Jesuit formation. In Part IV of the Constitutions, chapter 4, Ignatius addresses the spiritual life of scholastics engaged in study. He explains that they should not devote excessive time to prolonged prayer and meditation, since their studies require substantial intellectual energy. In paragraph 342, he prescribes an hour which includes the recitation of the Hours of Our Lady, the examinations of conscience and other prayers according to the person’s devotion.

Paragraph 343 provides for adaptations, including the substitution of meditation or other spiritual exercises, according to the person’s needs and the judgement of superiors.[12]

This is a crucial point.

The existence of an hour assigned to spiritual exercises for scholastics does not mean that Ignatius prescribed one hour of mental prayer.

The hour included various practices, particularly vocal prayer and the examinations of conscience.

Its contents were adaptable, and meditation was one possible component.

The legislation therefore differs substantially from the Teresian provision of a regular hour specifically devoted to mental prayer.

3. The absence of a universally prescribed period of mental prayer for fully formed Jesuits

The most decisive evidence appears in Part VI of the Constitutions, chapter 3. In paragraph 582, Ignatius discusses the spiritual practices appropriate to fully formed members of the Society. He presupposes that these men have advanced sufficiently in the spiritual life to exercise mature discernment. Concerning prayer, meditation, study and penitential practices, he deliberately refrains from establishing a universal rule governing their duration and manner.

Instead, he leaves the matter to the principle of discerning charity, with appropriate consultation and obedience.

Paragraph 583 permits the superior to prescribe a definite time for particular persons when necessary.[13]

The distinction is unmistakable.

Ignatius does not reject prayer. Nor does he suggest that fully formed Jesuits no longer need personal prayer.

Rather, he does not establish a single, fixed daily period of mental prayer as a universal constitutional obligation for all fully formed Jesuits.

This decision is consistent with the apostolic character of the Society.

The Society was founded to be available for preaching, teaching, spiritual direction, missionary activity and other forms of service.

Its daily organisation consequently differed from the communal horarium of enclosed contemplative religious life.

The absence of a universally prescribed period of mental prayer was not equivalent to the absence of an interior life.

It reflected a particular understanding of how prayer, spiritual maturity, obedience and apostolic availability should be integrated.

4. Finding God in all things

An important feature of Ignatius’s vision is the possibility of encountering God throughout daily activity.

In his correspondence, he repeatedly encourages his companions to seek God’s presence in their studies, conversations, journeys and works of charity.

In a letter of 1 June 1551 addressed to Antonio Brandão, he explains that scholastics should not engage in prolonged meditation at the expense of their studies, but should learn to discover God’s presence in their ordinary occupations.

This principle is central to the early Society’s spirituality.

The person is invited to live in a sustained relationship with God, extending beyond the explicitly designated moments of prayer.

Nevertheless, it is important to distinguish between the spiritual ideal and the concrete means provided to attain it.

Finding God in all things is not identical with spending a dedicated period in mental prayer.

Nor does an invitation to cultivate recollection during apostolic work necessarily amount to an organised programme of formation in the successive stages of mystical contemplation.

These are different questions, and they require different historical evidence.

VIII. The Introduction of a Daily Hour of Prayer under St. Francis Borgia

1. A significant development after Ignatius

The early Society’s practice did not remain unchanged.

The Jesuit historian Robert E. McNally examined this question in his important article, “St. Ignatius: Prayer and the Early Society of Jesus”, published in Woodstock Letters in 1965.[14]

His research documents the discussions and tensions within the early Society concerning the quantity and regulation of prayer.

Some communities practised longer periods of prayer than those generally prescribed. These local practices, however, should not be confused with universal constitutional legislation.

The decisive institutional development occurred under St Francis Borgia.

On 5 October 1565, shortly after his election as Superior General, Borgia issued a directive requiring an hour of daily prayer for the members of the Society, in addition to Mass and the examinations of conscience.

This was a significant development in Jesuit religious observance.

Nevertheless, the historical detail must be preserved: Borgia’s original prescription was an hour of prayer, not necessarily an hour exclusively devoted to mental prayer.

The hour could initially include vocal prayer and was not necessarily observed as one continuous period.

Over time, however, the practice developed towards a regular hour of morning prayer, increasingly associated with meditation.

2. The subsequent consolidation of the practice

The Fourth General Congregation, held in 1581, confirmed the established practice of the daily hour.

McNally points out that even this legislation did not explicitly require that the entire hour consist of mental prayer rather than vocal prayer.

The movement towards an established hour of mental prayer was therefore a historical development, not simply the application of an unchanged prescription originating with Ignatius.

This distinction is essential when studying the history of Jesuit spirituality.

One must not automatically project the later practice of the Society back into the original intentions of its founder.

Indeed, the later history of the Society demonstrates that its members themselves debated the relationship between the constitutional flexibility established by Ignatius and the subsequent regulations governing prayer.

3. Why was the additional hour introduced?

Several historical considerations help explain the development.

The Society was expanding rapidly, its apostolic responsibilities were increasing, and its members were living under increasingly diverse conditions.

Under such circumstances, the original reliance upon individual spiritual maturity and the discerning judgement of superiors raised practical questions.

Would all members maintain a sufficiently profound interior life without a common obligation to reserve time for prayer?

Would intensive apostolic activity gradually absorb the time and energy needed for personal prayer?

Could a common daily hour provide a necessary protection against the weakening of the interior life?

These considerations offer plausible explanations for the institutional development.

Nevertheless, historical precision requires a distinction between documented legislation and the motives inferred from its circumstances. The precise motivations of Borgia and the different parties involved cannot be reduced to a single cause without further documentary examination.

Moreover, the historical evidence shows that some Jesuits supported the additional regulation while others opposed it, precisely because they believed it departed from the original flexibility of Ignatius.

The controversy itself demonstrates that the change was substantial.

4. A later return to the principle of discernment

An important development occurred at the Society’s Thirty-first General Congregation in 1966.

In Decree 14, concerning prayer, the Congregation affirmed the absolute necessity of daily personal prayer while declining to impose a precisely defined universal norm regarding its manner and duration.

The decree explicitly appealed to the discerning charity presupposed by Ignatius in the Constitutions.[15]

This later development is instructive.

It shows that the relationship between a regular daily exercise of prayer and the particular apostolic character of the Society remained a significant question throughout its history.

The original vision of Ignatius and the subsequent institutional provisions were not simply mutually exclusive. They represented different ways of responding to the same fundamental requirement: ensuring that apostolic service remained genuinely rooted in a living relationship with God.

IX. Theological Discussion: What Exactly Is Being Compared?

1. Three distinct meanings of contemplation

The foregoing analysis allows us to distinguish three particularly important meanings of contemplation.

The first is contemplation as a spiritual method. This is especially evident in the imaginative contemplation of the Spiritual Exercises. The person deliberately considers a mystery or biblical scene, employing the faculties as instruments of prayer and remaining attentive to the action of grace.

The second is contemplation as a supernatural penetration of a mystery of faith. This appears particularly clearly in the theological tradition represented by Aquinas and Garrigou-Lagrange. The intellect, assisted and sometimes specially enlightened by the Holy Spirit, receives a deeper understanding of revealed truth.

The third is contemplation in the mystical sense developed by St John of the Cross. Here the emphasis falls upon a profound, infused communication from God, often beyond the ordinary operations of imagination and discursive understanding, through which the person is progressively purified and transformed in love.

These categories are not completely separate compartments. A particular act of prayer can contain elements of more than one form.

An imaginative contemplation may become the occasion of a profound mystical grace.

The study of a theological mystery may lead to loving recollection.

A person receiving infused contemplation may still retain a living relationship with the mysteries of Christ.

Nevertheless, the distinctions remain necessary if the different meanings of contemplation are to be understood accurately.

2. The distinction between the form and the degree of contemplation

A particularly useful theological clarification is the distinction between the form and the degree of contemplation. The form indicates the kind of spiritual activity taking place. The degree indicates the depth of the person’s spiritual transformation and the particular mode of the Holy Spirit’s action. A person may practise imaginative contemplation at a relatively elementary level while another receives profound spiritual graces during the same exercise.

Similarly, theological contemplation may remain largely discursive, or it may be illuminated by the gifts of the Holy Spirit.

Even contemplative prayer centred on a simple loving attention to God can undergo successive transformations as the person advances in the spiritual life.

Thus, the degree of contemplation cannot be determined simply by identifying the method employed. This principle also prevents an artificial hierarchy in which every form of meditation upon Scripture is regarded as necessarily inferior to any experience of silence. The decisive question is not merely what the person is outwardly doing, but what God is accomplishing within the person.

3. The exercise of prayer is a different category altogether

A further distinction is required when discussing the horarium of a religious community. The daily exercise of contemplative prayer belongs to the practical organisation of spiritual life. It concerns the time, regularity and conditions provided for personal prayer.

This exercise can include different forms of contemplation and can be practised by persons at different stages of spiritual growth.

It is therefore not a fourth degree of contemplation alongside the others.

It belongs to a different order of consideration.

The distinction between contemplative prayer as an exercise and contemplation as an experience is analogous to the distinction between an established period of study and an intellectual discovery.

A community may require its members to study for two hours each day. This does not mean that each member will make an important intellectual discovery during those hours.

Nevertheless, the regular exercise of study provides the conditions in which intellectual formation can develop.

Likewise, a community may establish two hours of mental prayer without claiming that its members will necessarily experience infused contemplation during those hours.

The value of the exercise is not dependent upon the immediate production of an extraordinary experience.

4. Does the absence of a dedicated period of mental prayer indicate an absence of contemplative formation?

This question lies at the heart of the historical comparison.

The answer must be carefully formulated.

The absence of a universally prescribed period of mental prayer does not, by itself, demonstrate that a religious tradition lacks contemplation.

The example of St Ignatius makes this clear.

However, the absence of such a period does indicate that the founder did not choose to make that particular exercise a universally obligatory structural element of the community’s daily life.

This is a real historical difference.

It concerns the means by which the community seeks to cultivate its spiritual identity.

In Teresian Carmel, the regular exercise of mental prayer is central to the institutional organisation of daily life.

In the original Society of Jesus, the fully formed member’s prayer was governed more explicitly by discerning charity, spiritual maturity, obedience and apostolic circumstances.

Neither observation is sufficient, on its own, to establish the relative spiritual depth of the members of either community.

It does, however, reveal a difference in their foundational structures.

5. A further question: Formation in the successive stages of mystical prayer

The comparison raises a more profound question. Did the original Society of Jesus establish a systematic programme of formation in the successive stages of mystical prayer comparable to the itinerary later described by St Teresa and St John of the Cross? This question should be distinguished from whether individual Jesuits could receive mystical graces. It should also be distinguished from the fact that the Spiritual Exercises provide a substantial pedagogy of spiritual discernment and conversion.

A programme designed to lead a person through the experience of the Spiritual Exercises is not necessarily identical with a programme intended to accompany the successive transformations of the spiritual life over many years. The two may overlap, but their immediate structure and purpose are not necessarily the same.

The Carmelite doctors explicitly describe the passage through different stages of prayer, the gradual transformation of the faculties, the purification of the senses and spirit, and the development of union with God.

Whether the original Jesuit formation system sought to provide a comparable, continuous and systematic accompaniment through these successive stages is a distinct historical question requiring further investigation. It cannot be answered simply by observing that St Ignatius himself experienced profound mystical graces.

X. Practical Questions for Spiritual Formation and Spiritual Direction

1. Why maintain a regular period of mental prayer?

The preceding distinctions have direct practical consequences. If contemplation in its deeper mystical sense is a gift of God, why should a person dedicate regular time to mental prayer? The answer is that the purpose of regular prayer is not to manufacture contemplation. It is to cultivate a faithful, sustained relationship with God, making oneself available to his word and action. The daily exercise allows the person to leave other occupations aside and attend deliberately to the Lord. This personal encounter has a value independently of any extraordinary experience. It also provides a privileged setting in which the person may gradually learn to recognise the different ways in which the Holy Spirit acts. Nevertheless, such regular prayer should not be understood as a technique that guarantees mystical progress. Fidelity to the exercise is necessary and fruitful, but the deeper transformations of the spiritual life remain dependent upon grace and the person’s free cooperation with it.

2. Can meditation, contemplative prayer and mystical contemplation coexist?

They not only can coexist; they frequently do. A person may begin a period of prayer by reading a biblical passage, continue by considering its meaning, enter into an affective conversation with Christ and eventually remain in simple loving attention to his presence. On another occasion, the same person may receive a particular light concerning the mystery being considered. At still another moment, God may draw the person into a deeper contemplative prayer in which the ordinary intellectual operations become secondary. There is no contradiction between these experiences.

The difficulty arises when one particular form is imposed indiscriminately upon everyone, regardless of spiritual maturity or the actual action of grace.

This is precisely why spiritual direction requires an adequate understanding of the different modes of prayer and the successive stages of spiritual growth.

3. The danger of confusing mystical contemplation with the absence of thought

One widespread misunderstanding identifies contemplation with the deliberate suppression of thoughts, images and intellectual activity. This understanding is inadequate. The contemplation described by St John of the Cross is not simply the result of making the mind empty.

It is a supernatural communication of God.

The person may become increasingly silent and receptive, but this silence derives its spiritual meaning from faith, love and the action of grace.

A psychological state of calm, by itself, does not constitute infused contemplation.

Likewise, an inability to meditate is not necessarily evidence of spiritual progress.

Spiritual direction must therefore distinguish between genuine contemplative development and experiences that may have quite different origins.

4. The danger of confusing a fixed exercise with spiritual maturity

Another misunderstanding concerns the amount of time spent in prayer. A religious community may prescribe two or three hours of daily mental prayer. This tells us something important about its institutional priorities, but it does not demonstrate that all its members have attained an advanced stage of contemplation. Conversely, a person who spends less time in formally designated prayer may possess a profound interior life.

The duration of prayer is therefore not a direct measurement of holiness or contemplation.

Nevertheless, this observation should not be used to minimise the practical importance of establishing sufficient time for prayer.

A dedicated exercise and a mature contemplative life are not identical, but the exercise can provide important conditions for the development of the latter.

5. Contemplation and apostolic activity

The history of the Society of Jesus raises a question that remains relevant for priests, religious and laypeople engaged in active ministry. Can apostolic activity itself become a place of genuine communion with God? Certainly. The Christian spiritual tradition recognises that God can be encountered in acts of charity, obedience, service and self-giving.

Yet the possibility of finding God in activity should not be confused with the assertion that every form of activity automatically constitutes contemplation.

A person may be intensely engaged in apostolic service while becoming progressively distracted from God.

The spiritual quality of activity depends upon the relationship with God that animates it.

Consequently, the ideal of finding God in all things requires an interior life capable of sustaining that relationship.

The historical development of Jesuit legislation illustrates the practical tension between preserving freedom in the organisation of prayer and ensuring that apostolic activity does not progressively displace it.

This tension cannot be resolved merely by choosing between action and contemplation.

It requires a mature integration of the two.

6. The complementarity of Lectio Divina, theological study and the Prayer of the Heart

A further practical conclusion concerns the need to distinguish and maintain complementary forms of spiritual formation. Theological study can open the intellect to a deeper understanding of revealed truth and, when pursued in prayerful attention to the Holy Spirit, become a genuine occasion of contemplation. Lectio Divina allows the believer to encounter Christ through his living Word, listening to what he communicates and putting that Word into practice. The Prayer of the Heart offers a privileged setting for the progressive development of a simple, loving relationship with Christ, open to the deeper forms of contemplative union. These activities are related, but they are not interchangeable. Theological study does not dispense with personal prayer. Lectio Divina does not eliminate the value of a dedicated exercise of recollection. The Prayer of the Heart does not render Scripture, doctrine or theological understanding unnecessary. A complete programme of spiritual formation should recognise the distinctive contribution of each. This approach also makes it possible to understand why the regular exercise of contemplative prayer has a particular importance even for people who already devote substantial time to the study of Scripture or theological reflection.

The immediate purpose of a dedicated period of mental prayer is not simply to acquire further information about God. It is to remain with God, to receive his action and to allow the relationship of love to develop and deepen.

7. The importance of distinguishing the stages of growth

The development of contemplation raises an additional pastoral requirement. The form of prayer appropriate to a beginner is not necessarily identical with that of a person undergoing a profound purification of the senses or spirit. At the beginning, discursive meditation may be particularly helpful. At another stage, affective prayer and recollection may become more prominent.

Later, the Holy Spirit may introduce a deeper contemplative prayer that can no longer be sustained by the same effort of the faculties.

The person must therefore be formed not only in techniques of prayer but also in an understanding of the laws governing spiritual growth.

Without such an understanding, spiritual direction risks making one of two opposite mistakes.

It may oblige a person to remain indefinitely within an earlier mode of prayer, even when God is leading the person beyond it.

Alternatively, it may encourage a premature abandonment of meditation and ordinary spiritual exercises, mistaking the desire for silence or the absence of thoughts for genuine mystical contemplation.

The teaching of St Teresa and St John of the Cross remains particularly valuable in avoiding these errors.

XI. Towards an Integrated Understanding of Contemplation

The preceding analysis suggests that a more precise theology of contemplation must distinguish several dimensions without separating them artificially. Contemplation can be considered according to its object, its form, its degree and the circumstances of its exercise. Its object may be a biblical scene, a revealed mystery or God himself. Its form may involve imagination, intellectual consideration, affective attention or a more immediate receptive relationship with God. Its degree depends upon the development of the spiritual life and the particular action of grace. Its exercise may occur within a dedicated period of mental prayer, during study, through Lectio Divina, in liturgical prayer or, in certain circumstances, in the midst of ordinary activity. These distinctions provide a more adequate framework for comparing spiritual traditions. They prevent the word “contemplation” from becoming an undifferentiated category into which every experience of prayer is placed. They also allow us to recognise the genuine richness of different spiritual schools without suppressing their historical and theological particularities. The contemplations of the Spiritual Exercises, the contemplation of the mysteries of faith described by Garrigou-Lagrange, and the infused contemplation of St John of the Cross are related, but they cannot simply be treated as identical. Likewise, the institutional practice of reserving one, two or three hours daily for mental prayer belongs to a different order of consideration. It is a practical provision intended to sustain the spiritual life. One may therefore acknowledge the profoundly mystical character of St Ignatius’s experience while also recognising that the original Society of Jesus did not establish the same daily structure of mental prayer as the reformed Carmelite and certain Franciscan communities. This distinction is historically important and theologically fruitful.

XII. A Proposal for Greater Unity and Clarity: The Two Fundamental Forms of Christ’s Self-Communication

1. The need for a common theological foundation

The renewed interest in Lectio Divina throughout the Church in recent decades offers an important opportunity to clarify the meaning of contemplation and to overcome certain unnecessary divisions between the different schools of spirituality.

The danger is that contemplation may continue to be classified according to separate spiritual traditions — Ignatian, Dominican, Carmelite, Franciscan and others — without sufficient attention being given to what unites them. Each school has developed its own terminology, methods and particular emphases. While these distinctions are legitimate and should be preserved, they should not obscure the fundamental unity of Christian contemplation.

Rather than beginning with the different schools, it would be fruitful to begin with Jesus Christ himself and with the ways in which he communicates himself to us.

This approach offers a common theological foundation for understanding the different forms of contemplation and their relationship to the Church’s sacramental life.

2. The two fundamental forms of Christ’s self-communication

If we consider the earthly ministry of Jesus, we can distinguish two fundamental and inseparable dimensions of his self-communication.

First, Jesus communicates himself through his Word. He speaks, teaches, reveals the Father, calls his disciples and communicates divine life through his words. As he declares: “The words I have spoken to you are spirit and life” (Jn 6:63).

His words are not merely information about God. They communicate something of his own divine life. Indeed, the one who speaks is himself the eternal Word made flesh (Jn 1:14). Through his words, Jesus gives himself to those who listen to him in faith.

Second, Jesus communicates himself through the total gift of his person, culminating in his Passion, Death and Resurrection. He offers himself to the Father for our salvation, and this self-offering is made sacramentally present in the Eucharist. In Holy Communion, he gives himself to us substantially, in his Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity.

These two dimensions are inseparable, but they are not identical in their manner of communication. The presence of Christ in the proclamation of his Word is real, while his presence under the Eucharistic species is substantial and unique, as the Church teaches in the Catechism of the Catholic Church, §1374.

We can therefore speak of two fundamental modes of Christ’s self-communication: through his life-giving Word and through the sacramental gift of his whole person in the Eucharist.

The same Jesus gives himself in both.

The first form is especially characterised by listening, reception, understanding and obedience to his Word. The second is especially characterised by communion, participation in his self-offering and union with him.

The distinction is not absolute, since both dimensions involve faith, love, receptivity and transformation. Nevertheless, it helps us recognise two complementary movements within Christian spiritual life.

3. Their unity in the celebration of the Eucharist

These two dimensions of Christ’s self-communication are brought together in the celebration of the Eucharist.

The Mass consists of the Liturgy of the Word and the Liturgy of the Eucharist. They are not two unrelated religious activities placed side by side. They constitute a single liturgical action.

The Second Vatican Council states that they “form but one single act of worship” (Sacrosanctum Concilium, §56).[16]

In the Liturgy of the Word, Christ speaks to his Church. As the same Constitution teaches, “He is present in His word, since it is He Himself who speaks when the holy scriptures are read in the Church” (§7).

In the Liturgy of the Eucharist, Christ makes present his sacrifice and gives himself to the faithful in Holy Communion.

Thus, the faithful are nourished at the two intimately united tables: the table of God’s Word and the table of the Body of Christ.

The Catechism explicitly expresses this unity when it states: “The Eucharistic table set for us is the table both of the Word of God and of the Body of the Lord” (§1346).[17]

The risen Christ’s encounter with the disciples on the road to Emmaus (Lk 24:13–35) offers a particularly beautiful biblical illustration of this movement. Jesus first opens the Scriptures to them, and then makes himself known in the breaking of the bread.

These two dimensions of the Eucharistic celebration provide, I suggest, a particularly fruitful theological framework for understanding the principal forms of Christian contemplation.

4. Lectio Divina and Ignatian contemplation as prolongations of the Liturgy of the Word

Within this perspective, Lectio Divina can be understood as a personal prolongation and assimilation of the Liturgy of the Word.

What takes place during the liturgical proclamation of Scripture is extended into the believer’s daily life through the attentive, prayerful reception of the Word of God.

The believer comes before Jesus, listens to him, seeks to understand what he is communicating, and responds by putting his Word into practice.

The purpose is not simply to acquire biblical knowledge, nor even to meditate upon religious ideas, but to receive Jesus himself through his living Word.

The same fundamental principle applies to the contemplations of the Gospel proposed in the Spiritual Exercises of St Ignatius.

Although their particular methodology differs from that of Lectio Divina, both involve an encounter with Christ through the biblical revelation. The person listens, considers, receives light and responds to the Lord.

Imaginative contemplation, the consideration of the persons, words and actions of Jesus, and the contemplation of the mysteries of his life can all be situated within this first fundamental movement: Christ communicating himself through his Word.

This does not mean that every Ignatian contemplation is simply a form of Lectio Divina, nor that all the graces received within these exercises can be reduced to intellectual understanding. It means that their common foundation is the reception of Christ’s revelation through Scripture and the mysteries of faith.

This relationship between Lectio Divina and the liturgy is expressly recognised by Benedict XVI in Verbum Domini, §86. He explains that prayerful reading of Scripture prepares for, accompanies and deepens the proclamation of the Word within the liturgical celebration.[18]

The increasing practice of Lectio Divina throughout the Church therefore offers an opportunity to recognise a fundamental unity beneath the diversity of methods used to contemplate the Word of God.

5. The Prayer of the Heart as a prolongation of Eucharistic Communion

There is, however, another fundamental dimension of Christian prayer, corresponding particularly to the second movement of Christ’s self-communication: the gift of himself and our union with him.

This dimension is especially expressed in the Prayer of the Heart.

The Prayer of the Heart is not primarily an exercise of considering a particular biblical scene or seeking to understand a specific revealed truth. Its immediate purpose is to remain with Jesus, to love him, to receive his love and to enter into an increasingly profound communion with him.

In this sense, it can be understood as a spiritual prolongation and assimilation of Eucharistic Communion.

In Holy Communion, Jesus gives himself to us, and we receive him. As he declares: “Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood remains in me and I in him” (Jn 6:56).

The Prayer of the Heart seeks to allow this communion to develop and permeate the whole of life.

Through a dedicated period of contemplative prayer, through Eucharistic adoration, through brief aspirations traditionally called arrow prayers, or through the repeated invocation of the Holy Name in the Jesus Prayer, the believer cultivates a continuous, loving relationship with Christ.

The emphasis here is not primarily upon receiving a particular word or understanding a determinate mystery, but upon communion with Jesus himself.

This distinction must be understood correctly. The Prayer of the Heart does not replace sacramental Communion, nor does it reproduce the unique Eucharistic presence of Christ. Rather, it allows the spiritual fruit of Communion to be welcomed, deepened and extended into daily life.

The Catechism teaches that “Holy Communion augments our union with Christ” (§1391).[19] The Prayer of the Heart can be understood as one of the privileged means by which this union is cultivated and allowed to grow.

Within this perspective, the different forms of contemplative prayer described by St Teresa of Ávila and St John of the Cross become more readily intelligible. Their ultimate orientation is not simply towards a particular kind of spiritual experience, but towards the progressive transformation of the person through union with God.

Even when the person passes beyond discursive meditation and the contemplation of particular images or mysteries, the relationship remains profoundly Christological. It is the same Jesus who communicates himself, now in a deeper and more immediately transforming manner.

6. Charismatic contemplation: receiving a divine illumination for the service of others

Alongside these two fundamental forms of contemplative prayer, we must recognise a third form of contemplation, characterised particularly by its charismatic and ministerial purpose.

Here, the person receives a particular illumination from the Holy Spirit, not primarily for personal spiritual growth or the deepening of his or her own union with God, but for the spiritual benefit of others.

This distinction corresponds to St Paul’s teaching on the charisms. In 1 Corinthians 12:7, he states that the manifestation of the Spirit is given “for some benefit”, namely for the good of the community. He immediately identifies, among these charisms, the word of wisdom and the word of knowledge (1 Cor 12:8).

St Thomas Aquinas develops this distinction by identifying two different purposes of grace. Gratia gratum faciens is ordered towards the sanctification of the person receiving it, whereas gratia gratis data is given to enable that person to assist others in their movement towards God (Summa Theologiae, I-II, q. 111, a. 1).

This distinction has particular importance for theology, preaching, teaching and spiritual formation.

A theologian, for example, may receive an illumination concerning a mystery of faith, an unexpected understanding of a biblical passage, or a new perception of the relationship between different revealed truths. Such an illumination may be given not principally for the theologian’s personal benefit, but so that something may be communicated to the Church.

Similarly, a preacher may receive a particular light concerning the Word of God that enables him to communicate its meaning with an unusual depth, clarity or spiritual efficacy. A professor of theology or a spiritual formator may experience something similar while preparing or delivering a lesson.

In such cases, the Holy Spirit does not simply assist the ordinary exercise of intellectual faculties. He may grant a particular insight or understanding ordered towards the spiritual nourishment and formation of others.

This is precisely the kind of distinction that St Thomas explores in Summa Theologiae, II-II, q. 177, a. 1, when discussing the gratuitous grace associated with speech. He explains that the knowledge a person receives from God is made beneficial to others through its communication. The Spirit therefore assists not only the reception of divine knowledge but also its effective transmission.

We should, however, avoid identifying every theological insight, every successful sermon or every profound intellectual discovery with a gratia gratis data. These may also arise through study, acquired theological wisdom, the ordinary assistance of grace or the gifts of the Holy Spirit operating within the person’s own spiritual life.

The distinctive feature of charismatic contemplation, as understood here, is that a particular illumination is received under the action of the Holy Spirit and is principally ordered towards the service and edification of others.

Such contemplation should not be confused with the degree of mystical union attained by the recipient. A charismatic illumination does not necessarily indicate an advanced stage of personal sanctification. The grace is given for a particular service and must be exercised with humility, ecclesial discernment and fidelity to the revelation entrusted to the Church.

We can therefore distinguish three complementary orientations of contemplation.

The first concerns the reception and assimilation of Christ’s Word, particularly through Lectio Divina, biblical meditation and contemplation of the mysteries of faith.

The second concerns the deepening of personal communion with Christ, particularly through the Prayer of the Heart and the successive forms of contemplative prayer described by the mystical doctors.

The third concerns the reception of a particular illumination of the Holy Spirit for the spiritual benefit of others, particularly through theology, preaching, teaching and other ministries of the Word.

These three orientations may overlap within the same spiritual experience. The same theologian may contemplate a mystery for personal nourishment, grow in union with God through that contemplation, and receive a particular light intended for transmission to others.

Their distinction concerns principally the purpose and mode of the divine action, rather than three mutually exclusive spiritual activities.

The Church’s contemplative tradition would benefit greatly from recognising this third dimension, which reminds us that contemplation is not ordered exclusively towards the sanctification of the individual. It may also become a privileged means through which the Holy Spirit enlightens, nourishes and builds up the entire Body of Christ.

7. Two complementary forms of prayer, rooted in the same Christ

We may therefore recognise two major and complementary movements within Christian spiritual life.

The first is the reception of Christ through his Word. Its privileged expression is Lectio Divina, together with those forms of meditation and contemplation that receive and assimilate the biblical revelation, including the contemplations of the Spiritual Exercises.

The second is the deepening of communion with Christ through a loving, sustained relationship with him. Its privileged expression is the Prayer of the Heart, encompassing dedicated contemplative prayer and related practices of recollection, adoration and invocation.

The first corresponds particularly to the Liturgy of the Word; the second corresponds particularly to the Liturgy of the Eucharist and the grace of Holy Communion.

These correspondences should not be interpreted as exclusive divisions. Lectio Divina can lead to profound infused contemplation, and the Prayer of the Heart remains nourished by Scripture and the mysteries of faith. Both forms depend entirely upon the action of the Holy Spirit.

Nevertheless, the distinction provides a simple and intelligible theological orientation.

It also makes clear why the two forms of prayer should not be placed in competition with one another.

Listening to Jesus and remaining in communion with him belong to the same relationship of love. His Word prepares us for deeper union with him, while communion with him makes us increasingly capable of receiving and putting his Word into practice.

The two movements continually enrich one another.

8. A practical recommendation for the Church today

The rediscovery and wider practice of Lectio Divina offer a particularly favourable opportunity to present this unified vision of Christian prayer. Rather than continuing to classify contemplation exclusively according to the different spiritual schools, it would be beneficial to situate their various methods within the fundamental sacramental structure of Christian life. The Liturgy of the Word and the Liturgy of the Eucharist provide a common reference point accessible to every Christian.

From this foundation, the faithful can be introduced both to Lectio Divina and to the Prayer of the Heart, while recognising their complementarity. This does not require abandoning the spiritual traditions of St Ignatius, St Teresa, St John of the Cross or the other great masters. On the contrary, it allows their particular contributions to be understood within a wider and more unified theological framework. Such an approach would also help avoid confusing the different forms of contemplation with their successive degrees. One can distinguish the form of prayer being practised while remaining attentive to the depth and particular mode of the Holy Spirit’s action within it. The ultimate purpose of this clarification is pastoral and formative.

The Church needs not merely a collection of spiritual methods, but a coherent understanding of how Christ communicates himself and how the believer can receive, assimilate and respond to this communication throughout the spiritual journey.

The two fundamental movements — receiving Christ through his Word and growing in communion with him — are not competing spiritualities. They are complementary expressions of the one Christian life, rooted in the two inseparable dimensions of the Eucharistic celebration. It is always the same Jesus who gives himself to us: the Jesus who speaks words that are spirit and life, and the Jesus who gives us his Body and Blood, drawing us into communion with himself and, through him, with the Father in the Holy Spirit.

Recognising this unity may offer one of the simplest and most fruitful ways of bringing greater theological clarity, spiritual coherence and practical harmony to the Church’s renewed understanding of contemplation.

Conclusion: Distinguishing the Forms of Contemplation While Recovering Their Fundamental Unity

The distinctions developed throughout this study are not merely terminological. They concern the manner in which Christian prayer is understood, practised, taught and transmitted, and ultimately the way in which the believer is helped to progress towards union with God.

The word “contemplation” embraces a variety of forms, contents and degrees. It can refer to the imaginative contemplation of a Gospel scene, the prayerful penetration of a mystery of faith, the reception of a particular illumination from the Holy Spirit, or the profound, infused and transforming contemplation described by St Teresa of Ávila and St John of the Cross. These forms are related, but they cannot simply be identified with one another.

A further distinction must be maintained between contemplation as a spiritual experience and contemplative prayer as a regular exercise. The latter designates a time deliberately reserved for personal, interior prayer, during which the believer seeks to remain with God and receive his action. Such an exercise can be established within the daily horarium of a religious community or undertaken through personal commitment. The experience of infused contemplation, however, remains a gift of God and cannot be produced or prescribed.

The historical comparison between St Ignatius of Loyola, the original Society of Jesus, Teresian Carmel and the Franciscan reforms illustrates the importance of this distinction. Although St Ignatius was himself a mystic and his Spiritual Exercises contain various forms of contemplation, the original Jesuit Constitutions did not prescribe a fixed daily period of mental prayer as a universal obligation for fully formed Jesuits. This differs from the institutional arrangements established by St Teresa and certain Franciscan reformers. The subsequent introduction of a daily hour of prayer within the Society, particularly under St Francis Borgia, represents a significant development that must be distinguished from the original legislation of the founder.

These historical differences reveal distinct approaches to the organisation of spiritual life, but they should not lead us to separate the various traditions into isolated schools of contemplation, each employing its own terminology without reference to a common theological foundation.

Indeed, the renewed interest in Lectio Divina throughout the Church provides an important opportunity to recover this unity.

Rather than beginning with the different methods of contemplation, we can begin with Jesus Christ himself and the two fundamental and inseparable dimensions of his self-communication: through his Word, which is spirit and life (Jn 6:63), and through the total gift of himself, culminating in his Passion, Death and Resurrection and made sacramentally present in the Eucharist.

These two dimensions are celebrated together in the Liturgy of the Word and the Liturgy of the Eucharist, which, according to the Second Vatican Council, “form but one single act of worship” (Sacrosanctum Concilium, §56).

This liturgical unity offers a particularly fruitful foundation for understanding the principal forms of Christian contemplation.

Lectio Divina, together with the contemplation of the Gospel and the mysteries of faith, including the methods proposed in the Spiritual Exercises, can be understood as a prolongation and personal assimilation of the Liturgy of the Word. Through them, the believer listens to Christ, receives his communication, grows in understanding and responds by putting his Word into practice.

The Prayer of the Heart, in turn, can be understood as a prolongation and deepening of Eucharistic Communion. Through dedicated contemplative prayer, adoration, the Jesus Prayer and other forms of loving recollection, the believer seeks to remain with Christ, receive his love and allow the union nourished through sacramental Communion to permeate the whole of life.

These two movements are complementary and inseparable. Listening to Christ leads towards deeper communion with him, while communion with him makes the believer increasingly capable of receiving and living his Word. Both are sustained by the Holy Spirit, and both can become occasions of the deeper contemplative graces through which God progressively transforms the person.

Their distinction must therefore never become a separation. Nor should their complementarity eliminate the necessary distinctions between the different forms and degrees of contemplation. The same divine communication can be received in different ways and at different depths, according to the stage of spiritual growth and the particular action of the Holy Spirit.

We must also recognise a third orientation of contemplation, more explicitly charismatic in nature. Through the gratiae gratis datae, particularly the word of wisdom and the word of knowledge mentioned by St Paul (1 Cor 12:7–8), the Holy Spirit may communicate a particular light not primarily for the personal sanctification of the recipient, but for the spiritual benefit of others. This dimension has particular importance for theologians, preachers, professors and spiritual formators, whose mission involves communicating the mysteries of faith and assisting others towards union with God. Such illuminations must be distinguished from the progressive degrees of infused contemplation ordered towards personal sanctification. They remind us that the action of the Holy Spirit is not only sanctifying but also charismatic and ecclesial: he gives light so that it may be communicated, and he enriches particular members so that the whole Body of Christ may grow (cf. 1 Cor 12:7; Eph 4:11–13).

We can therefore recognise three complementary orientations of contemplation: the reception and assimilation of Christ’s Word; the deepening of personal communion and union with him; and the reception of particular illuminations intended for the spiritual benefit of others. These three orientations are not mutually exclusive, nor do they constitute three successive degrees of spiritual growth. They concern principally the manner and purpose of the divine communication. The same person may experience them at different moments, and they may even overlap within a single contemplative experience. Nevertheless, their distinction is essential for understanding the richness of the Holy Spirit’s action in the Church.

The consequences for spiritual formation are considerable.

It is not sufficient to introduce Christians to different techniques of prayer without explaining their theological foundations, their complementarity and their place within the progressive journey towards union with God. Nor is it sufficient to prescribe regular periods of prayer without helping people recognise the different ways in which the Holy Spirit acts as their spiritual life develops.

A complete formation should therefore provide both an understanding of the principal forms of prayer and an adequate knowledge of the successive stages of spiritual growth. It should help the believer practise Lectio Divina and the Prayer of the Heart faithfully, while recognising when the Holy Spirit is inviting the person towards a deeper and more receptive form of contemplation. It should also help those entrusted with theological teaching, preaching and spiritual formation to recognise, discern and cooperate with the particular charismatic illuminations granted for the service of others, without confusing these gifts with personal holiness or the degree of mystical union attained.

Ultimately, the purpose is neither to defend one school of spirituality against another nor to establish a hierarchy of methods. It is to understand how Jesus Christ communicates himself and how the believer can progressively receive, assimilate and respond to this communication, whether for personal sanctification and union with God or for the spiritual benefit of others.

The unity of Christian contemplation is not found in the uniformity of its methods, but in the unity of the One who communicates himself through them.

It is always the same Jesus Christ: the Word made flesh, whose words are spirit and life; the Saviour who gives himself to us in his Body and Blood, drawing us into communion with himself; and the risen Lord who, through the Holy Spirit, grants particular lights and charisms for the edification of his Church.

The different forms of contemplation, the regular exercise of contemplative prayer and the charismatic illuminations given for the service of others must ultimately serve the same divine purpose: to allow Christ to communicate himself ever more fully, to bring each person towards the fullness of union with him, and to build up his entire Body in faith, hope and charity, until all are brought into perfect communion with the Father, through the Son, in the Holy Spirit.

---

Footnotes

[1] St Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologiae, II-II, q. 180, aa. 1, 3–4. Thomas distinguishes the movement of meditation towards truth from the simpler act of contemplation. The English translation is available at https://www.newadvent.org/summa/3180.htm.

[2] Catechism of the Catholic Church, §§2705–2719, especially §§2709–2715; cf. §§2721–2724. These paragraphs distinguish meditation and contemplative prayer while affirming their common orientation towards the encounter with God. Official Vatican text: https://www.vatican.va/content/catechism/en/part_four/section_one/chapter_three/article_1/iii_contemplative_prayer.index.html.

[3] St Ignatius of Loyola, Spiritual Exercises, Annotations 1–3; see also §§101–109, 110–117, 121–126 and 230–237. The First and Second Annotations are especially important for distinguishing the methods of prayer from the divine illumination that may be received during them. English translation by Elder Mullan, S.J.: https://www.orderofthecommonlife.org/spiritual-exercises-full-text.

[4] St Ignatius of Loyola, Autobiography, particularly the account of the illumination at Cardoner; Spiritual Diary, entries of 1544–1545. The Institute for Advanced Jesuit Studies identifies the surviving manuscript of the Spiritual Diary and provides information on its digitisation: https://jesuitportal.bc.edu/2021/12/06/december-2021-digital-copies-of-ignatian-texts-available-through-arsi/.

[5] Réginald Garrigou-Lagrange, O.P., The Three Ways of the Spiritual Life, especially chapter 4 and the concluding note, “On the Call to the Infused Contemplation of the Mysteries of Faith”. His treatment explicitly connects infused contemplation with faith and the gifts of understanding and wisdom, while distinguishing contemplation directly concerned with revealed mysteries from contemplation concerned with their practical consequences. Text: https://www.ecatholic2000.com/lagrange/three-ways-spiritual-life.shtml.

[6] Jean Khoury, “The Grammar of Christian Contemplation: Forms and Degrees from Dionysius to St John of the Cross”, School of Mary. This study develops the distinction between the different forms and degrees of contemplation and their importance for spiritual formation. https://schoolofmary.org/the-grammar-of-christian-contemplation-forms-and-degrees-from-dionysius-to-st-john-of-the-cross/.

[7] St John of the Cross, Ascent of Mount Carmel, Book II, chapters 13–15, especially II.13.4–6; Dark Night, Book I, chapters 9–10, and Book II, chapter 5. The distinction between discursive meditation and simple, loving contemplation is especially clear in Ascent II.13. English text: https://www.ccel.org/ccel/john_cross/ascent.v.xiii.html.

[8] St Teresa of Ávila, Life, chapter 22; Interior Castle, Sixth Mansions, chapter 7. Teresa insists that the sacred humanity of Christ remains central to the spiritual life, including at its most advanced stages. See https://www.ccel.org/ccel/teresa/life.viii.xxiii.html.

[9] St Teresa of Ávila, Constitutions (1567), chapter I, §3, and chapter II, §6. The text explicitly establishes an hour of morning prayer and another before Matins, with provision for spiritual reading where appropriate. Spanish text, with a critical introductory note concerning the textual history: https://teresavila.com/constituciones/.

[10] Octavian Schmucki, O.F.M. Cap., “Prayer and Contemplation in the Legislation and Life of the First Capuchins”, especially the discussion of the Constitutions of 1536, chapter III, no. 41. The legislation prescribes at least two hours of prayer. https://www.capdox.capuchin.org.au/studies/a-retrospective-on-the-capuchin-reform/prayer-and-contemplation/.

[11] José Álvarez, O.F.M., “San Pedro de Alcántara (1499–1562), Reformador de la Orden Franciscana”, in Directorio Franciscano. The historical account records that the Ordinances of 1562 prescribed three hours of daily mental prayer. The precise reference concerns the Alcantarine reform and should not automatically be extended to every branch of the Franciscan Recollect movement. https://www.franciscanos.org/santoral/pedroalc03.html.

[12] St Ignatius of Loyola, Constitutions of the Society of Jesus, Part IV, chapter 4, §§340–343. Paragraph 342 describes the hour assigned to spiritual exercises for scholastics, including the Hours of Our Lady and examination of conscience. Paragraph 343 allows adaptations. Official Jesuit documentary text: https://documenta.jesuits.global/docs/C/4/.

[13] St Ignatius of Loyola, Constitutions, Part VI, chapter 3, §§582–583. Paragraph 582 refrains from imposing a universal rule governing the prayer, meditation and other exercises of fully formed members; paragraph 583 allows superiors to prescribe particular times when necessary. Official Jesuit text: https://documenta.jesuits.global/docs/C/6/.

[14] Robert E. McNally, S.J., “St. Ignatius: Prayer and the Early Society of Jesus”, Woodstock Letters, vol. 94, no. 2 (Spring 1965), pp. 109–134. Especially relevant are pp. 113–120 on the intentions of Ignatius and pp. 124–130 on the development of the hour of prayer under Borgia and his successors. Historical study available in the digitised journal: https://jesuitarchives.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/woodstock-094.pdf.

[15] Society of Jesus, Thirty-first General Congregation, Decree 14, “Prayer” (1966), particularly no. 11. The decree affirms daily personal prayer while declining to impose a universal norm concerning its precise manner and length. Published in Jesuit Life & Mission Today: The Decrees & Accompanying Documents of the 31st–35th General Congregations, edited by John W. Padberg (St Louis: Institute of Jesuit Sources, 2009). Digital text: https://jesuitsourcesdigital.bc.edu/k8viobt/.

[16] Second Vatican Council, Sacrosanctum Concilium (4 December 1963), §§7 and 56. Section 7 affirms Christ’s presence in the proclamation of Scripture, while §56 teaches the essential unity of the Liturgy of the Word and the Liturgy of the Eucharist.

[17] Catechism of the Catholic Church, §§1346–1347 and 1373–1374. These paragraphs establish the unity of the two liturgical parts while distinguishing the different modes of Christ’s presence, particularly his substantial presence in the Eucharist.

[18] Benedict XVI, Post-Synodal Apostolic Exhortation Verbum Domini (30 September 2010), §§53–56 and 86–87. Particularly important are the discussion of the sacramentality of the Word (§56) and the relationship between Lectio Divina and the Eucharistic liturgy (§86).

[19] Catechism of the Catholic Church, §§1391–1392. These paragraphs explain how Eucharistic Communion deepens union with Christ and nourishes the life of grace

---

Bibliography

The Unresolved Controversy over Contemplation in the Twentieth Century: Were Dominicans, Jesuits and Carmelites Speaking of the Same Reality? A Reassessment in the Light of the Different Forms and Degrees of Contemplation Described by St John of the Cross

Primary Sources

Aquinas, Thomas. Summa Theologiae. Particularly II-II, questions 179–182 and 188. English translation of the Fathers of the English Dominican Province.

Benedict XVI. Verbum Domini: On the Word of God in the Life and Mission of the Church. Post-Synodal Apostolic Exhortation, 30 September 2010. Particularly §§53–56 and 86–87.

Catechism of the Catholic Church. Vatican City: Libreria Editrice Vaticana, 1992. Particularly §§2705–2724.

Ignatius of Loyola. The Spiritual Exercises. Translated by Elder Mullan, S.J. New York: P. J. Kenedy & Sons, 1914.

Ignatius of Loyola. The Constitutions of the Society of Jesus. Translated, with introduction and commentary, by George E. Ganss, S.J. St Louis: Institute of Jesuit Sources, 1970.

Ignatius of Loyola. A Pilgrim’s Testament: The Memoirs of St Ignatius of Loyola. Translated by Parmananda R. Divarkar, S.J. St Louis: Institute of Jesuit Sources, 1995.

Ignatius of Loyola. The Spiritual Diary. See the surviving manuscript in the Archivum Romanum Societatis Iesu and the editions of Ignatius’s spiritual writings.

John of the Cross. The Collected Works of St John of the Cross. Translated by Kieran Kavanaugh, O.C.D., and Otilio Rodriguez, O.C.D. Washington, DC: ICS Publications, 1991. Particularly Ascent of Mount Carmel and Dark Night.

Second Vatican Council. Sacrosanctum Concilium: Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy. 4 December 1963. Particularly §§7, 48 and 56.

Second Vatican Council. Dei Verbum: Dogmatic Constitution on Divine Revelation. 18 November 1965. Particularly §§2, 21 and 25.

Society of Jesus. “Decree 14: Prayer.” Thirty-first General Congregation, 1966. In Jesuit Life & Mission Today, edited by John W. Padberg. St Louis: Institute of Jesuit Sources, 2009.

Teresa of Ávila. The Collected Works of St Teresa of Ávila. Translated by Kieran Kavanaugh, O.C.D., and Otilio Rodriguez, O.C.D. Washington, DC: ICS Publications. Particularly The Book of Her Life, The Way of Perfection, The Interior Castle and the Constitutions.

Secondary Sources and Historical Studies

Álvarez, José, O.F.M. “San Pedro de Alcántara (1499–1562), Reformador de la Orden Franciscana.” Directorio Franciscano. https://www.franciscanos.org/santoral/pedroalc03.html.

de Guibert, Joseph, S.J. The Jesuits: Their Spiritual Doctrine and Practice. Translated by William J. Young, S.J. Chicago: Loyola University Press, 1964.

Garrigou-Lagrange, Réginald, O.P. The Three Ages of the Interior Life: Prelude of Eternal Life. Translated by Sr M. Timothea Doyle, O.P. St Louis: B. Herder Book Co., 1947–1948.

Garrigou-Lagrange, Réginald, O.P. The Three Ways of the Spiritual Life. London: Burns Oates & Washbourne, 1938.

Khoury, Jean. “The Grammar of Christian Contemplation: Forms and Degrees from Dionysius to St John of the Cross.” School of Mary. https://schoolofmary.org/the-grammar-of-christian-contemplation-forms-and-degrees-from-dionysius-to-st-john-of-the-cross/.

McGinn, Bernard. The Presence of God: A History of Western Christian Mysticism. New York: Crossroad Publishing, 1991 onwards.

McNally, Robert E., S.J. “St. Ignatius: Prayer and the Early Society of Jesus.” Woodstock Letters 94, no. 2 (Spring 1965): 109–134.

Schmucki, Octavian, O.F.M. Cap. “Prayer and Contemplation in the Legislation and Life of the First Capuchins.” Capuchin Franciscan historical studies, CapDox.

Turner, Denys. The Darkness of God: Negativity in Christian Mysticism. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1995.

Von Balthasar, Hans Urs. Prayer. San Francisco: Ignatius Press, 1986.