How Far Is It from Voegelin’s Reflective Distance to Mysticism?

For anyone who knew Eric Voegelin personally, the question elicits a smile. “Why, of course, the distance is quite far” is my own, spontaneous answer. Voegelin’s habitus, as I know it from Munich as well as Stanford, was clearly that of a man of reflective distance, not of mysticism. Reflection was his daily mode of thought, accompanied by reading, writing, and discussing. Distance was his way to stay focused on his contemplative – as opposed to activist – life devoted to philosophizing. Although he kept his distance from people and popular causes, he was not a recluse. He was a keen observer of life around him, high or low, and drew conclusions about, for example, the current political process which were unfailingly far more perspicacious than mine, even if I disagreed with them frequently for their conservatism. It would be hard for me to think of Voegelin as a mystic, as I still see him comfortably stretched out in his study chair, cigar in one hand, and the Wall Street Journal or a science fiction book in the other. Nevertheless, because of his insistence on articulating the experiential base of all philosophizing, there is perhaps at least an implicit element of mysticism in his thought, worthy of more detailed investigation.