As of late I have started reading St. John of the Cross’ Dark Night of the Soul. In reality, Dark Night is supposed to be the fourth part of a fourth part series from a poem entitled Ascent of Mount Carmel, but it is almost always published by itself. The first three books are a discussion of the sensual part of the soul, then of the spiritual part of the soul, and the third the activity of the soul. The fourth part, Dark Night, is supposed to deal with the soul’s passivity or “And the second night, or purification, pertains to those who are already proficient, occurring at the time when God desires to bring them to the state of union with God. And this latter night is a more obscure and dark and terrible purgation, as we shall say afterwards”
I may go back and read the rest of Ascent, but at this point I feel like Dark Night should be required reading for all Christians who are missing the spiritual highs and infatuation of their early relationship with God. Like all relationships, I have found it has lost its constant sense of wonderment and awe when I approach my highest Love. I do miss the joy and delight I used to find at all times by being within the presence of God. Yes, there are occasions when I am flabbergasted by the beauty and gracefulness of my Lord, but these do not sustain for weeks at a time as in the early days, but only for a mere matter of moments to remind me of the love God shares with us all.
The first part of the treatise discusses the 7 deadly sins and how these sins arise often in a beginner’s worship and jubilation. John cautions us to be mindful of our point and purpose in worshiping the Highest. It is not for our sake that we love God and enter into worship, but it must always be for the purpose of exalting the Lord. First pride, in which beginners often believe themselves to be as great or greater in their love for God as their spiritual confessors and superiors (John was a monk) and so go on disregarding advice and warnings. One of the things that has struck me as a I read this treatise is even though it is hundreds of years old, we still deal with the exact same sins today. The unique thing about this book is his discussion of sin are not sins that anyone can commit, but ones specifically in the context of believers. This sin of pride is today seen in those who forsake the church feeling they can do better on their own. It is also apparent in those who feel no need for a confessor. This is where my sin of pride comes in. I have always felt, to a large extent, that I do not need a confessor because I have Christ, but in truth Christ does not always provide me with enough accountability. If I tell Christ that I have sinned against another person by gossiping about them, it does not deal with the root of the problem, which is my broken relationship. Christ calls us into relationships and into confession of when we trespass on another. (Quick nerd fact: the crime of trespass was originally something you could do against the king. In fact all early common laws were not a suit against another person, but a suit against another person for offending the king. It is interesting to me that the KJV uses trespass against us instead of debtors because of this reason. Apparently to them, trespass held more of a true meaning, and I’d like to think it is because to trespass against another is really to trespass on the King, but that is just conjecture.)
In my next post: avarice, spiritual luxury, and Sufism v. Determinism.
