A Response to Grypma & Commentary on Mysticism
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
69059 JCNSummer06 05/03/2006 12:26 PM Page 27 A Response to Grypma & Commentary on Mysticism BY BARBARA MONTGOMERY DOSSEY “MYSTICISM ...IS NOT AN OPINION: IT IS NOT A PHILOSOPHY. It has nothing in common with the pursuit of occult knowledge.On the one hand,it is not merely the power of contemplating Eter- nity: on the other, it is not to be identified with any kind of religious queerness. It is the name of that organic process which involves the perfect consummation of the Love of God: the achieve- ment here and now of the immortal heritage of man.Or,if you like it better—for this means exactly the same thing—it is the art of establishing his conscious relation with the Absolute.”1 E VELYN U NDERHILL,MYSTICISM, 1911 extend my thanks to Dr. founder3 of modern secular nursing. nitions and criteria according to which Grypma2 and the Journal of However, there are many issues on Nightingale qualifies as a full-fledged, Christian Nursing for atten- which Dr. Grypma and I disagree in nineteenth-century “practical mystic.” tion to Florence Nightin- our analysis of Nightingale.We seem to What does Dr. Grypma consider a gale (1820-1910), the be far apart on the essential meanings mystic to be? I am left wondering.This philosophical and practical of terms such as “mystic,”“mysticism” does not prevent her, however, from and “spirituality”—yet it is difficult to suggesting that the classification of ■ Barbara Montgomery know for certain because Dr. Grypma Nightingale as a mystic is a “New Age” Dossey, PhD, FAAN, RN, is nowhere defines explicitly what she and “postmodern” move. [See note 1] I director of Holistic Nursing Consultants in Santa Fe, means by these terms. The view that Nightingale is a mys- New Mexico, and is a widely-published author. In my book Florence Nightingale: tic is hardly postmodern. In fact,“post- She is International Co- Mystic,Visionary,Healer4 and in my modern mystic” is an oxymoron, in Director of the Nightingale Initiative for Global Health recent co-authored Florence Nightingale view of the timeless, perennial mystical (NIGH).A major focus of 5 her work currently is holis- Today: Healing, Leadership,Global Action, tradition that I discussed in my books, a unknown tic and integral nursing, reviewed by Kathy Schoonover- view that is drawn from much of the compassionate care of the 6 dying, and virtual education. Shoffner in JCN, I provided the defi- scholarly writing in this area. [See note Photographer JCN/Summer 2006 27 69059 JCNSummer06 05/03/2006 12:27 PM Page 28 2.] I was not the first to describe of mysticism,“All mystics speak the York,as a result of the activities of the Nightingale as a mystic. Others, such as same language, for they come from the celebrated Fox sisters, who claimed the Evelyn Underhill (1875-1941), the same country.”9 He might have added ability to contact and communicate British authority on the Christian mys- that all mystics live at the same time, so messages from the spirits of the dead.12 tical tradition, did so nearly a century to speak, because the mystical vision David J. Hufford, professor of ago.7 To establish Nightingale as a nine- transcends not only space but also time. humanities at Penn State College of teenth-century mystic, I used Under- Therefore, it is inconceivable to me Medicine, has described the confusion hill’s criteria and five phases of mystical that the consideration of Nightingale as that exists between “spirituality and spiritual development.Thus, my pri- a mystic could be regarded as New Age “spiritualism,”and the widespread, mary historical research required read- or postmodern when the spiritual tra- reckless ways in which these terms are ing Nightingale’s letters and correspon- ditions in which she was rooted are interchanged.13 Spirituality has as much dence of her sustained spiritual devel- utterly ancient, spanning millennia. relationship with spiritualism as Jesus opment and action over her lifetime. Dr. Grypma conflates “spirituality” Christ has with Harry Houdini. Con- fusing spirituality with spiritualism stigmatizes the former, and influences people unwittingly to reject the term spirituality for bogus reasons. Having mingled these terms, no wonder Dr. Grypma is dubious of Nightingale’s stature as a role model for nurses. Through over a decade of both pri- mary and secondary historical research of Nightingale’s life and work, I have encountered widespread resistance within organized religions and profes- My conclusions were not based mainly with what she calls “mystical spiritual- sional nursing toward her. Nearly on Nightingale’s Suggestions for Thought ism.”This is a disastrous confusion. always the objections are vaguely artic- (1860, three volumes, 829 pages), as Dr. Spirituality has nothing to do with ulated and often based on hearsay and Grypma stated.8 They are congruent spiritualism. In Definitions and Standards innuendo, such as the oft-heard blatant with the assertions of Underhill and in Healing Research, spirituality is falsehoods that she was an atheist and other authorities—that a mystic is one defined as “the feelings,thoughts, expe- died of venereal disease. [See note 3 who has attained the status of union riences, and behaviors that arise from a and note 4.] I have tried to understand with the Absolute, however named, or search for that which is generally con- why Nightingale rankles many Chris- who fervently believes that such a sidered sacred or holy.Spirituality is tians. Here are four of the most com- union is possible.As a result of my own usually,though not universally,consid- mon reasons I have discovered: research of Nightingale’s richly docu- ered to involve a sense of connection (1) Oneness with God. The central mented life, I am confident that she with an absolute, imminent, or tran- premise of mysticism—that it is possi- easily qualifies as a mystic on these scendental spiritual force, however ble to achieve unity with the terms. named, as well as the conviction that Absolute—has always made many The fact that scholars have viewed meaning, value, direction, and purpose Christians nervous because they con- Nightingale as a mystic for nearly a are valid aspects of the universe.”10 sider it blasphemy: man becoming century defies Grypma’s contention Spiritualism, in contrast,“is the practice God. It has long been so. Consider the that this characterization is a recent of systematically communicating with Catholic Church’s trial of Meister Eck- tactic. Nightingale was being consid- the spirits of deceased persons, often hart during fourteenth-century Ger- ered a mystic long before the terms through mediums, [and] is found and many.Today,Eckhart is widely recog- “New Age” and “postmodern” were highly valued in many cultures nized, along with Hildegard of Bingen, invented.The Christian mystic Louis throughout the world.”11 It is also the as perhaps the greatest Christian mystic Claude de Saint-Martin two centuries name given to a social movement that Germany ever produced, yet in his life- ago said, emphasizing the universality sprang up in 1848 in upstate New time he evoked the Church’s wrath for 28 JCN / Volume 23, Number 3 69059 JCNSummer06 05/03/2006 12:27 PM Page 29 preaching essentially what Nightingale would say five centuries later: that God dwells within, and that one can achieve We seem to be far apartt on the esential union and oneness with the Almighty. The Church almost certainly would meanings of terms. have burned Eckhart at the stake had he not died before his trial was com- pleted.14 Crucifixion and burning are out of style today,but they still come in different flavors, such as indicting Nightingale as “increasingly unbal- mauled by bears because they made “spirituality.”Many contemporary anced,”a “fiend” or “vindictive” (terms fun of his baldness (2 Kings 2:23-24). Christians embrace these terms and repeated from others in Dr. Grypma’s The apostle Paul struck a sorcerer tem- find strength and fulfillment in actual- articles), or as an “avenging angel,”a porarily blind (Acts 13:11).And even izing them in their lives, while others term in the title of a recent book on Jesus blasted an apparently innocent fig find them objectionable, repellent, Nightingale.15 tree for not bearing fruit (Mt 21:19; “New Age,”“postmodern,”blasphe- Nightingale asked,“Where shall I Mk 11:13-14, 20-22). Nice behaviors? mous or satanic. It does Christian nurs- find God? In myself.That is the true You decide. But as Meister Eckhart ing no service to shoehorn it into a Mystical Doctrine. But then I myself proclaimed,“God never tied man’s sal- single belief structure. I know many must be in a state for Him to come and vation to any pattern of life . So one devout Christian nurses who are dwell in me.This is the whole aim of must be permeated with the divine attracted to the relationship of oneness the Mystical Life; and all Mystical Presence.”19 To require mystics always with God espoused by Eckhart, Hilde- Rules in all times and countries have to demonstrate the meeker virtues is to gard,Teresa, Nightingale and other been laid down for putting the soul strip them of their humanness and sur- Christian mystics; I know others who into such a state.”16 Again, this view is round them with a celestial halo, which run in the other direction. anchored squarely in the Christian they consistently reject. Perhaps the (4) Religious tolerance. Two of mystical tradition. For instance, Eckhart mystics see a kind of complexity in the Nightingale’s favorite books were the said,“The eye with which I see God is Divine, having merged with it, that is Holy Bible and the Bhagavad Gita, the the same as that with which he sees not obvious to the rest of us.They real- sacred Hindu text, which many Chris- me.