To love God means to love his creation, and, I would suppose, especially
those are one's direct connection to that creation. Love of neighbor is
considered a test of love of God.

Obviously if one is totally focussed on God, one may not be conscious of
others, but even the mystics were not focussed on God to the exclusion of
all else every moment of their lives.

One of my favourite examples is St. Theresa of Avila. One time one of the
sisters happened on her while she was eatomng A quail (I think) with great
gusto. The sister registed some shock.
St. Theresa said some thing like "What's wrong. When I pray I pray and when
I eat I eat.
Indeed, enjoying the gifts of God is an act of love.

Here is Eliot's take on the subject:

"There are three conditions which often look alike
Yet differ completely, flourish in the same hedgerow:
Attachment to self and to things and to persons, detachment
From self and from things and from persons; and, growing between them,
Which resembles the others as death resembles life,
Being between two lives-unflowering, between
The live and the dead nettle. This is the use of memory:
For liberation-not less of love but expanding
Of love beyond desire, and so liberation
From the future as well as the past.

----- Original Message ----- 
From: Peter Montgomery
To: [log in to unmask]
Sent: Monday, March 29, 2010 11:57 PM
Subject: Re: Eliot on Charles Williams' mysticism

Depends on what is meant by love.
Detachment from created beings, doesn't necessarily mean lack of love,
but it does mean lack of desire to possess or be possessed by created

Love of one's parents changes. Adult love is not the same as the child's
To hang on to child's love of a parent when one is an adullt could be very

On the other hand, divine love is all consuming and will not abide
It demands, as in the act of love, complete submission.

So there is a paradox. It is perhaps partially resolved by seeing God in
one's parents,
for all created beings are reflections of God.

The intensity of loving God can give one a newer and deeper appreciation
of created beings, by seeing how they reflect God.

----- Original Message ----- 
From: Terry Traynor
To: [log in to unmask]
Sent: Sunday, March 28, 2010 12:19 PM
Subject: Re: Eliot on Charles Williams' mysticism

>Last but not least, let us preface these observations
>with the epigraph of 'Sweeney Agonistes' drawn from
>St. John of the Cross:
>"Hence the soul cannot be possessed of the divine union,
>until it has divested itself of the love of created beings."

Does this mean that the only way to be "possessed of the divine union" is to
stop loving your parents, your children, your spouse, etc.?