This contribution probes the question how the biblical instruction to pray continuously was understood in the history of Christian spirituality. It investigates two main traditions of interpretation. The first tradition interprets the instruction from a material-temporal perspective. Prayer should be, in the literal sense of the word, everlasting, never ending and perpetual. The second tradition focuses more on the relationship with God, its permanent character, and its lasting and enduring quality. It has to do with the question how a sustainable growth can be improved. It is a spiritual challenge, requiring an in-depth understanding and conversation, to consider and reflect on the difficult and complex interaction between these two approaches.
‘Prayer without ceasing’ is a central theme in the history of Christian spirituality.
This contribution probes the question how this biblical instruction to pray continuously was understood in the history of Christian spirituality. It investigates two main traditions of interpretation. The first tradition interprets the instruction from a material-temporal perspective. Prayer should be, in the literal sense of the word, everlasting, never ending and perpetual. The second tradition approaches it from a processual-dialogical interpretation, focusing more on the relationship with God, its permanent character, and its lasting and enduring quality. It has to do with the question how sustainable growth can be attained. It is a spiritual challenge to consider and reflect on the difficult and complex interaction between these two approaches. It requires an in-depth understanding and conversation.
Interpretations that emphasise the material-temporal continuity of prayer sought to determine the forms of visible and tangible temporal permanence. Such a material continuity is not easy to spell out, with the result that communities developed different solutions to address this temporal problem. This can be illustrated by the following examples.
Some monks in the desert tried to pray the whole psalter with its 100 and 50 psalms aloud every day as their attempt to fulfil the commandment of the Lord ‘to pray always and not to lose heart’. They did not sleep to pray the whole day and night without any interruption. They were therefore called the
Other monks founded monasteries that focused specifically on permanent prayer. They divided themselves in two or more groups and prayed the psalms and other prayers in successive sections throughout the day and night (Gülden
A more interiorised form of continuous prayer, but seeking to implement the same idea of perpetuality, is the Jesus prayer. This form of prayer is built on continuous repetition, ending up in something like automatic speech, as the Jewish mystic Joseph Karo explained it, or something like
A rather modern form of continuous prayer is the idea of a world-wide church praying the liturgy of the hours. For this reason, Vatican II connects the commandment of everlasting prayer with the liturgy of hours. The idea is that the divine office is practised all over the world in successive waves. This means that there are always and everywhere people praying the official prayer of the church. By doing so, the church fulfils the commandment of the Lord to pray without ceasing. Here, the category of continuous space has taken over the category of continuous time. It represents a kind of relay race in prayer.
In all these examples, people try to fulfil the commandment of the Lord by translating the category of uninterrupted time into concrete categories of physical repetition, cooperation, behaviour or space. This explains why it can be described as a material-temporal solution.
In the processual-dialogical interpretation of the biblical instruction, the category of continuous time is translated into the category of a dialogical process to indicate a process of continuous transformation. This interpretation can also be illustrated in terms of different examples.
Clement of Alexandria, for instance, interpreted everlasting prayer in a broader sense as having to do with our whole life, with all we are and all we do in our daily lives. Someone prays continuously, when ‘he transforms his whole life into prayer’.
Famous is the mystical interpretation of abbot Isaac, a desert monk, who is regarded as the expert in prayer. For him, the uninterruptedness of prayer is embedded in the divine–human relationship. Every prayer can become a mystical encounter with God, and precisely, this is its uninterruptedness. His interpretation is developed as follows.
All these hindrances should be left behind when one enters into praying. This is the only way to pray ‘without interruption’ (
‘Without interruption’ is thus understood by Isaac as a processual-dialogical quality, not as a temporal-material issue.
Abbot Isaac compares this uninterrupted prayer to a small feather that is moved by the slightest breeze which lifts it in the air.
Augustine, looking for a strong fundament for a prayerful life, considers the human desire as the deepest layer. In his view, a spiritual life tries to discover the longing for God in all our needs and desires. His presupposition is that, on its most fundamental level, human desire is longing for God. Spiritual life is to discern step by step, in all our needs and desires, the need for God. If someone comes into contact with this existential outreach to God, that person is in prayer. Hence, his often-quoted statement: ‘Desire is always praying’.
The Carmelite tradition tries to understand the commandment of the uninterrupted prayer in the light of the motto of the prophet Elijah: ‘The Lord lives, in whose presence I stay’.
In the Ignatian tradition, the concept of uninterrupted prayer is translated into contemplation in all our activities (
These processual-dialogical approaches try to discover an in-depth spiritual layer in our life itself, in our daily life, our immediate connectedness with God, our longing for God, our being in his presence and in our involvement in his creative love. This deeper level is understood as being continuously in prayer.
Is it possible to connect the two lines described thus far? Are they connected intrinsically? Or do they belong to separate worlds? Before proposing an answer, an example of a difficult conversation between two highly spiritual persons is useful. This conversation took place in the 4th century between abbot Epiphanius, the founder of a monastery in Gaza, his birthplace. As abbot of this desert community, Epiphanius trained his monks in the practice of uninterrupted prayer during a period of 30 years. He instructed them in praying the psalms as a contemplative exercise practised in those days by many desert monks, continuously and permanently, sometimes by repeating one sentence only, namely ‘Be pleased, O God, to rescue me. O Lord, make haste to help me!’ (Ps 70:1).
Epiphanius was asked to become the bishop of Cyprus. After his departure, his successor decided to change the order of prayer. It was no longer about praying the psalms continuously in the mode of
[
Epiphanius could not find common ground between the two different forms of the divine office: he separated the relativity of temporal-material schemes, on the one hand, from the spiritual transformation aimed at by the monastic praying of the psalms or the canonical hours. He focused on the level of time: saying the psalms in the monastic way covers all hours of the day, but praying on the canonical hours covers only 8 h a day. What to do with the other hours?
This miscommunication is typical of many other times. Time and again, people are obsessed by continuous prayer in the material-temporal sense. They do not recognise the deeper objective of divine human transformation. On the other hand, people obsessed by mystical processes do not understand the anthropological need for temporal-spatial incarnation in our bodily structures. The question thus remains how to facilitate the difficult conversation between a material-temporal scope and a processual-dialogical perspective.
In my opinion, there are two principles that may be helpful to bridge the gap between too much materialism and too much spiritualisation in fulfilling the instruction to pray without ceasing. The first principle reflects positively on the material-temporal infrastructure of prayer. To restrict the exaggerating tendency of quantitative expansion of prayer, the category of
The basic principle of
Other examples include the saying that a little bit of yeast is enough to let leaven all the flour (Mt 13:33), that the little tongue is enough to keep the whole person in check, that a little bit is enough to guide the whole horse, that ships are guided by a very small rudder and that a forest is set ablaze by a small fire (Ja 3:1–12). All these images demonstrate the same tenor: a part represents the whole. The spiritual training is trying to participate in the whole by performing a part.
The other principle is about insight and training in mystical transformation. Mystical transformation leads us from our temporal-spatial self-centeredness into the free space of God’s love. Essentially, this process is seen from our human perspective, a process of letting go, of giving over the initiative to God. This is about a training in trust and at the same time, basically, a training in prayer: ‘Take over, my Lord, what I am doing’.
‘Let me be an instrument in your hand’. This transformation is not dependent on quantity but on quality: concentration and letting go. This is exactly what abbot Isaac tried to teach us: if you go to prayer, let go all your self-centred concerns, just for the time you are praying, try to forget your self-centred attitude. Give up your initiative, just for a moment, and God will take over.
Both principles are necessary. They bring one another in balance: The principle of
Finally, there is much to be learned from Simone Weil, who remarked that one should pray just one Our Father in the morning, with complete attention. One Our Father, no more, and it will permeate one’s whole day. It will transform one’s soul in love.
The author has declared that no competing interests exist.
K.W. is the sole author of this research article.
This article followed all ethical standards for a research without direct contact with human or animal subjects.
Financial support was received from the UFS for the publication of this article.
Data sharing is not applicable to this article as no new data were created or analysed in this study.
The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of any affiliated agency of the author.
For an exegetical and historical overview, see Gülden (
The Vulgate translates: ‘Semper orare et non deficere’.
The Vulgate translates: ‘Sine intermissione orate’.
Clemens van Alexandrië,
Origenes,
Origenes,
Origenes,
Johannes Cassianus,
Johannes Cassianus,
Johannes Cassianus,
Johannes Cassianus,
Johannes Cassianus,
Johannes Cassianus,
Johannes Cassianus,
Augustinus,
See, for example, 1 Kings 17:1, 18:15; 2 Kings 3:14, 5:16.
For a discussion, see Waaijman (