Mysticism and the Spiritual Life: Reflections on Karl Rahner's View of Mysticism
Bibliographic record
Abstract
[…]mysticism is quite different from religious experiences in ordinary faith, where the relationship with the Divine is mediated through normal categories of experience given in a person's culture and history. This difference raises the question of the relationship of mysticism to ordinary religious experiences. What is the role and status of mystical experience in the spiritual life? What, if anything, does the mystic teach us about spiritual reality and the spiritual ideal? What are the appropriate terms of a theology of mystical experience? I will begin to explore these questions by comparing Rahner's view of mystical experiences with what he calls ordinary "experiences of the spirit" or "everyday mysticism." I will then outline the transpersonal theory of Michael Washburn, in briefly exploring a question Rahner poses regarding the possible relevance of a psychology of mystical transformation in the development of a Christian theology of mystical experience. Finally, I will conclude with some qualifying reflections about mysticism that I believe to be pertinent to the development of a contemporary theology of mystical experience.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".