chapter 2 Marguerite’s Mystical Annihilation Joanne Maguire Robinson 2.1 Introduction Many medieval mystical texts make dramatic claims for the possibility of union with God, although few argue for the complete obliteration of the distinction between creature and Creator. Many present biographical accounts complete with authorizing visions, and some are prescriptive and biographical in outlin- ing a path or set of stages toward a goal. Many advocate extreme asceticism and many are strongly Christological and contemplative. They often refer to scriptural passages and patristic authors to justify their claims. They tend to be preoccupied with the problem of human sinfulness as a barrier to union with God. Most medieval mystics encourage devotion to the church, its liturgical cycles, and, often, the Eucharist. Above all, many medieval mystical texts aim at some sort of fundamental, mediated transformation that enables the mystic to approach the divine. Marguerite Porete’s Mirror of Simple Souls, initially written by the 1290s and officially condemned in the early 14th century, distinguishes itself from prior and contemporary mystical texts in many ways.1 Marguerite presents a struc- tured mystical itinerary, but she aims for spiritual annihilation, not temporary union with or a vision of God. Marguerite’s goal is annihilation of the soul, which is the culmination of a seven-stage path of increasing perfection in which the soul becomes “what God is” while still embodied.2 To call annihilation a 1 The best historical and political study of this text can be found in Sean Field, The Beguine, the Angel, and the Inquisitor: The Trials of Marguerite Porete and Guiard Cressonessart (South Bend, in: University of Notre Dame Press, 2012). 2 This use of “annihilation” first appears in the 13th century in a sermon by Gilbert of Tournai. For an exploration of this claim, see Sean Field, “Annihilation and Perfection in Two Sermons by Gilbert of Tournai for the Translation of St. Francis,” Franciscana, (1999)., 248. This claim is supported in a very useful article by Juan Marin, “Annihilation and Deification in Beguine Theology and Marguerite Porete’s ‘Mirror of Simple Souls’,” Harvard Theological Review 103, no. 1 (2010). This is not annihilation in the sense of apocalyptic obliteration or complete de- struction at the hands of God, understood by medieval scholastics as nothing more than a conceptual notion in light of God’s omnipotence. On the history of this sort of annihilation, see Paul Verdeyen, Annihilation, Religion Past and Present (Brill Online, 2013). Marguerite’s © koninklijke brill nv, leiden, ���7 | doi �0.��63/978900433856�_004 <UN> Marguerite’s Mystical Annihilation 39 culmination, however, emphasizes the kinds of structure, traditional theo- logical schemes, and formality that Marguerite aims to subvert. Culmination language also emphasizes the idea of ascent, thus opposing Marguerite’ s insistence that the soul must be absolutely “abyssed” in wretchedness to realize its true identity. Indeed, annihilation is not so much a transformation from one status to another as a realization of the soul’s inborn nature. Unlike many of her contemporaries, Marguerite downplays bodily suffering through ascetic discipline because her ideal poverty is a poverty of the will, not mate- rial poverty. Furthermore, she rarely refers to scriptural or traditional warrants for her ideas. That she was condemned for some of her teachings should not surprise her contemporary or current readers, as she clearly aims to unsettle the status quo. Marguerite’s peculiarity among her mystical peers is driven by her particular doctrine of mystical annihilation. That idea was subversive and was considered suspect, although it has deep roots in Neoplatonic and esoteric speculation in Christian tradition.3 Marguerite proudly claims the esoteric nature of her thought throughout the Mirror, which, however abstruse at times, is a testa- ment to her deep knowledge and closely held convictions.4 She employs social status metaphors to classify those who can and those who cannot understand her message; for instance, she writes that vulgar folk “are kept outside the court of [Love’s] secrets, as a peasant would be barred from the court of a gentleman in the judgment of his peers, for no one can be part of the court (certainly not the court of a king) if he is not of the correct lineage.”5 She understands herself as one of the few souls elected to fulfill the highest spiritual calling: to realize use of the term parallels its use in Sufi mystical texts, in which the mystic lives absorbed utterly within God in a state of annihilation. In this state the human characteristics of the annihilated soul are replaced with those of the divine. 3 Marguerite, in effect, renounces renunciation, setting herself apart from authors such as Bernard of Clairvaux (1090–1153), Catherine of Siena (1347–1380), and Francis of Assisi (1181/2–1226). 4 On the esoteric nature of her claims, see especially Chapters 1, 9, 17, 52, 62–63, 68, 75–76, 84–86, 96, 98, 111, 121–2, 132–3 and 139. 5 All excerpts are from Ellen Babinsky’s translation unless otherwise noted. Marguerite Porete, The Mirror of Simple Souls, trans., Ellen Babinsky, The Classics of Western Spirituality (New York: Paulist Press, 1993). This translation, which differs slightly from Babinsky’s, is drawn from Marguerite Porete, Speculum Simplicium Animarum, Mirouer Des Simples Ames, Corpus Christianorum, vol. 69 (Turnhout: Brepols, 1986). Chapter 63, lines 12–15, cccm, 184: “… ilz sont hors mis de la court de voz secrez, ainsi comme seroit ung villain de la court d’ung gentil homme en jugement de pers, ou il n’en peut nul avoir, se il n’est de lignage.” <UN>.