Contemplative Prayer: A New Framework by Dom David Foster

by David Foster

David Foster, author of the bestselling Reading with God and Deep Calls to Deep , extends his discussion of contemplative prayer in terms of its philosophical framework. Contrasting a traditional framework with one based on continental philosophy, Foster explores a number of metaphysical and epistemological questions as well as the place of silence in a philosophy of language. Defending traditional insights of the mystical tradition, including its underlying metaphysical realism, religious experience as awareness of God, and the role of apophatic discourse in mysticism, Foster argues that the sense of God's absence can be a threshold of prayer.

Genres: Spirituality

Paperback

Published January 1, 1753

About the author

Librarian Note: There is more than one author in the GoodReads database with this name.
This profile might contain books by several authors.

Reviews

[Sam Eccleston · Rating 4 out of 5]

While I enjoyed this book, I found it an odd read; the parts dealing with the philosophical underpinnings of the author's approach to understanding contemplative prayer are oddly disjointed- as if insufficient context has been supplied in order for his remarks to fully make sense. If you are familiar with the philosophers in question you can make out the gist of what the Foster is getting at, but even then there are ambiguities in the phraseology (particularly the pronoun referencing), which can leave you confused as to the referent of individual remarks.

There are some genuinely very insightful descriptions of the process and effects of contemplation which are worth digesting, particularly if you are searching for ways to adequately describe the experience yourself; however, this in itself points back to the oddness of the book- the philosophical content seems almost like irrelevant window-dressing for a much more interesting subject: the experience of contemplation.

One wonders, additionally, what value the framework proposed really has; the author engages with a lot of avowedly atheistic philosophers and re-shapes their ideas to fit a Christian context. This is fine in and of itself, but it hardly offers the potential for a bridge in understanding between the two sides of the debate; the ontological gulf, so to speak, is too great for that.