Ruusbroec: Apophatic Theologian or Phenomenologist of the Mystical Experience?
The Journal of Religion 2000 DOI: 10.1086/490557 (opens in new tab)
Study at a glance
AI-extracted from the abstract| Characteristics | Theoretical or philosophical paper Peer reviewed |
|---|---|
| Topics | Mystical experience Mysticism |
| Key points | Argues that Ruusbroec should not be classified as a phenomenological theologian, contending that his work is better understood within Neoplatonic and theological discourse rather than experiential or phenomenological categories. |
Abstract
Denys Turner's excellent study The Darkness of God has focused the attention of scholars of Western spirituality on the Neoplatonic discourse of medieval mystical theologians.' Turner argues that their descriptions of the union between God and man should not be read in experiential terms but in the light of a Neoplatonic discourse that contains the resources for an implicit critique of an interpretation in experiential terms. One of the authors whose writings suffered the most from a reading in Jamesian, experiential terms is the Blessed Jan Van Ruusbroec (1293-1381), the greatest mystical theologian of the Low Countries.2 In this article I will question the claim that Ruusbroec can justifiably be called "a phenome-