http://www.ai.edu RSS feeds for Aquinas Institute of Theology 60 http://www.ai.edu/Resources/Blogs/AquinasMatters/tabid/216/articleType/ArticleView/articleId/126/The-Doctrine-of-the-Immaculate-Conception-Ever-Deepening-Treasure.aspx#Comments 0 http://www.ai.edu/DesktopModules/DnnForge%20-%20NewsArticles/RssComments.aspx?TabID=216&ModuleID=743&ArticleID=126 http://www.ai.edu/DesktopModules/DnnForge%20-%20NewsArticles/Tracking/Trackback.aspx?ArticleID=126&PortalID=0&TabID=216 http://www.ai.edu/Resources/Blogs/AquinasMatters/tabid/216/articleType/ArticleView/articleId/126/The-Doctrine-of-the-Immaculate-Conception-Ever-Deepening-Treasure.aspx Marty O'Bryan is currently enrolled at Aquinas Institute. She is studying towards a Master of Arts - Catechesis of the Good Shepherd degree. The most Blessed Virgin Mary, from the first moment of her conception, by a singular grace and privilege of almighty God, and by virtue of the merits of Jesus Christ, Savior of the human race, was preserved immune from all stain of original sin. (Catechism of the Catholic Church, 124, #491) In the entire history of the Roman Catholic Church, the doctrine of the Immaculate Conception, Ineffabilis Deus, was the most protracted and controversial of all the questions ever posed for its consideration. Formally introduced around the year 1100, the question was not settled until 750 years later when, on December 8, 1854, Pope Pius IX promulgated its doctrine. Two factors had slowed its acceptance: there was no clear evidence for it either in scripture or in the patristic writings. Regarding the former, the greatest scriptural evidence against the doctrine of the Immaculate Conception lay in the writings of St. Paul where it is stated that all have sinned in Adam (Romans 5:12) and “all have sinned and are deprived of the glory of God” (Romans 3:23) (O’Connor, vi). By the time the Church began to actively consider Mary’s sanctity, it was universally accepted that she had committed no sin during her lifetime. Thus, the dilemma: in light of her purity, how could Mary have been exempt from the universal need for redemption? From the early charges of heresy by some of the most illustrious Doctors of the Church (Albert the Great, Thomas Aquinas, Bonaventure) (Balic, 188-191), to the full and loving embrace by others with minds equally astute, theologians argued the truth of is claim, employing the theological practices of their respective moments in time. Throughout its long history, many came within its reach, some holding the treasure of its revelation in their hands, only to let go when faced with its paradox. Their tools of human thought and language developed with its history, beginning with effusively wrapped language of logic and followed by systematic analysis to dissect and articulate the argument. In the decades after its promulgation, the new lens of anthropology was employed to deepen the understanding of its truth; and today, the hermeneutic of the psychology of being is furthering the conversation. This paper will present a brief history of the development of the doctrine of the Immaculate Conception, pointing out along the way how near to it so many came before its official promulgation. The paper will also present its current meaning for the Church and new vistas for its interpretation that have opened in the light of faith. In addressing the history of the doctrine of Mary’s preservation from original sin, it is necessary to present the Church’s understanding of this sin. According to the Catechism of the Catholic Church (CCC), original sin is not an individual’s “personal fault.” It is the “deprivation of original holiness” in humankind’s nature, a deprivation that inclines human beings to sin (CCC, 102, #405), sin being the lack of the fullness of love for God and neighbor caused by a persistent attachment to certain goods (CCC, 453, #1849). This deprivation of original holiness that marks “the whole of human history” is due to “a primeval event, a deed that took place at the beginning of the history of man . . . by the original fault freely committed by our first parents [Adam and Eve] (CCC, 98, #390).” This is frequently referred to as “the sin of Adam.” The Catholic Church, therefore, distinguishes between personal sin and original sin, the latter a term coined by St. Augustine (350-430). Early Christian writings do not offer evidence of the belief that Mary was free from personal sin. In the Eastern Church, Origen (185-254), when interpreting Simeon’s statement to Mary, “ . . . (and you yourself a sword will pierce) . . .” (Luke 2:35) as referring to the presence of sin, claimed that it was at the foot of the cross where Mary had sinned by doubting her son’s divinity and mission (Joussard, 55-57). Tertullian (c.160-220) held a similar teaching in the West (O’Connor, xi). A light, however, began to shine on the Church’s thought regarding Mary when St. Ambrose (340-397) spoke and wrote only of her sanctity and her “Divine Maternity.” St. Jerome (347-420) maintained the same and even more so (Joussard, 68). By the time of the Council of Ephesus in 431, the Church, moving further toward the doctrine, was now in agreement regarding Mary’s sanctity (her never having sinned); and it was at this council that she was given the title theotokos, God-bearer, “Mother of God” (Journet, 43). Prior to the Council of Ephesus, St. Augustine had articulated the doctrine of original sin. He held that original sin is transmitted in the marriage act, through which a person first comes into existence, and that all persons inherit it (McBrien, 187). A contemporary of his, the ascetic Pelagius, taught that all sin was personal sin and that one could overcome it through the strict exercise of one’s will (a heresy that was officially rejected at the Council of Ephesus). He also maintained that Mary was all holy and completely free from even the slightest stain of sin (Journet, 40). Augustine, completely agreeing with him regarding Mary’s personal sanctity, yet, finding it impossible to deny the teachings of Paul, declared in response to Pelagius that “pure grace” had exempted Mary from this universal principle. Here it was, the gem of truth; yet, he was unable to articulate how this had happened. Consequently, a few years before his death, Augustine, again faced with the question of Mary’s exemption from original sin, responded in the negative, writing that Mary was born with original sin and that only later was she sanctified by grace (Joussard, 69-74). For centuries, through the end of the patristic era, this opinion remained uncountered in the writings and preaching of the Fathers of the Church. There was one exception, however—the Venerable Bede (672-735). Reflecting on John the Baptist being filled with the Holy Spirit in the womb of Elizabeth, his mother, Bede preached that this was John’s purification from original sin (Journet, 77-78). That neither he nor others applied this insight to Mary is remarkable. Hence, fertile ground lay fallow. The Council of Ephesus in 431 had fueled the veneration of Mary, and it was in the Byzantine East that Mary’s sanctity was first celebrated liturgically (Dvornik, 90). By the end of the 7th century, the Feast of Mary’s conception, known as the Feast of the Conception of St. Anne, Mother of the Theotokos, had been added to other liturgies celebrating her sanctity (Dvornik, 90). The feast expanded to Byzantine southern Italy, possibly as early as the first half of the 9th century. Its celebration spread to Ireland; and, in less than two centuries, it was being celebrated in the monasteries of southern England (Bouman, 123-125). The veneration of the Blessed Mother’s conception and its liturgical celebration spread throughout Western Catholicism. While there yet had been no approbation from Rome, the dictum, “lex orandi, lex credendi,” (the law of prayer is the law of belief) was being borne out (Bevans, 97), thus opening the door more widely to official consideration. At the beginning of the Scholastic period in the Western Church (11th – 15th century), the schism with the East prevented any further nourishment of the West with the teachings from the Eastern Fathers on the Conception of Mary (Balic, 162). In addition, Augustine’s doctrine of the universality of original sin ruled absolute in the halls of theology (Balic, 162). Two beliefs prevailed. One was that the Holy Spirit had sanctified Mary at the moment of the Annunciation (Balic, 163). The other was held by St. Bernard (1090-1153). In a break from Augustine’s doctrine that sanctification from original sin occurred only after birth, Bernard claimed that Mary was purified while still within her mother’s womb. Almost 500 years after Bede, St. Bernard continued the conversation by moving the moment of her sanctification further back, closer to the very moment of her conception. The idea of her immaculate conception was very much in his mind, for Bernard wrote that her exemption from original sin would have lessened the redemptive act of Christ (Balic, 183-184), the thought of which he could not bear to embrace. St. Anselm (1033-1109), the father of Scholasticism, wrote that he was open to a “higher explanation,” believing that Mary “was brought into existence from Adam, in the same way as all others,” but that she “was one of those who were cleansed from their sins by Him [Jesus] before He was born” (Balic, 168). While not indicating at what moment in her existence she was cleansed, he nevertheless was also intimating an immaculate conception. Bernard’s and Anselm’s instincts could have flung open the gates to epiphanies for the next generations; however, the great theologians of the golden age of Scholasticism (approximately 1230-1340)—St. Bonaventure, St. Albert the Great, and St. Thomas Aquinas—dispensing with the effusive and mystical language of their predecessors, employed the analytic systematic, and didactic method of their day. Overlooking the writings of St. Anselm, they clung to Augustine’s teaching of the universality of original sin. Yet championing St. Bernard’s claim of Mary’s sanctification while still in her mother’s womb, they each wrote that, while without sin during her life, the Mother of God nevertheless required purification from the sin she had inherited (Balic, 186-192). It was the Franciscan and Scottish priest, John Duns (1266-1308), known as Duns Scotus, who solved the dilemma and reconciled the contradicting doctrines of original sin, of Christ as universal Redeemer, and of Mary’s preservation from original sin. He reasoned innovatively that Mary’s preservation from original sin would not have lessened Christ’s redemptive action at all and that, in fact, it would have made Christ’s redeeming act “more excellent,” writing that it would be “a more excellent benefit to preserve a person from evil than to permit him to fall into it and then deliver him from it (Balic, 207). With regard to Augustine’s doctrine of Original Sin, Scotus was delightfully perceptive, writing that, since “everything is possible to God that is not manifestly contradictory in itself” (Balic, 204), and because of the merits of Christ, her Redeemer (Balic, 207), “God could have conferred as much grace on her in the first moment of her soul’s existence as He does on another soul at . . . baptism” (Balic, 205). With this insight, the brilliant and “Subtle Doctor” became known as the Doctor of the Immaculate Conception (Balic, 204), synthesizing and reconciling nearly 1000 years of argumentation and opening wide the path to its promulgation by Rome. This, however, would not occur for at least another 500 years. In spite of Scotus’ brilliant and synthesized articulation of the schools of Augustine and Anselm, their followers argued in opposition to one another, “maculists” against “immaculists.” The latter were led by the Franciscans with their allegiance to Scotus, their brother. The maculists were led by the Dominicans whose beloved Angelic Doctor, Thomas Aquinas, had argued with Augustine (Sebastian, 214). Aquinas’ canonization in 1323 fueled their vigor, as they saw it as an official sanction from Rome (Sebastian, 214). In 1477, Franciscan Pope Sixtus IV approved two offices and a Mass in honor of Mary’s Conception, which served as a catalyst for renewal of the argument. The argumentation and animosity rose to such fever pitch, each camp denouncing the other as heretics, that in 1482, and again a year later, Sixtus IV issued a Bull vehemently threatening with excommunication anyone who denounced another as being a heretic (Sebastian, 238). Beneath the raging battle of theological argumentation and name-calling, another sentiment was welling up. Encouraged by Sixtus IV’s approval of the offices and Mass in honor of the Virgin, universities began requiring students to take an oath to defend the doctrine of the Immaculate Conception; and by the end of the 17th century, nearly 150 universities in Europe had expressed support of the doctrine, approximately 50 of them requiring the oath (Sebastian, 239-241). Theologians and saints of religious orders became known for their support of the doctrine—Carmelites, Jesuits, Augustinians, Sts. Teresa of Avila, John of the Cross, Joseph Cupertino (Sebastian, 241). The establishment of ecclesiastical congregations and confraternities throughout Europe dedicated to the Immaculate Conception and the widespread embrace of the doctrine by the faithful proved another doctrine at work, sensus fidelium, which states that the entire body of the faithful has a “deep instinct within the bosom of the mystical body of Christ” on matters of faith and morals (Bevans, 78-79). And so, the doctrine was advanced. Throughout this long period, provincial generals and heads of State were increasingly petitioning Rome to grant special privileges in observance of the Conception of Mary. While granting the status of “feast,” accompanied by days of obligation and dates of is celebration on the calendar, the magisterium remained silent regarding the feast’s status as dogma (Laurentin, 274-278). Over those 500 years, what appeared to be delay and uncertainty on the part of the magisterium was, instead, a prudence that encouraged deeper study and clearer articulation of the subject (Laurentin, 270). Finally, after consulting the bishops of the entire Church, Pope Pius IX, on December 8, 1954, read the decree of the bull, Ineffabilis Deus, “revealed by God” and therefore, to “firmly and constantly be believed by all the faithful” (Laurentin, 312). Since that day in 1854, theologians have continued to reflect on the meaning of the Immaculate Conception, deepening and widening its implications for all. French Cardinal Charles Journet (1891-1957) saw in her immaculate purity “the Woman” who is united to Christ and whose history is the history of the Church itself—1) the Church before Christ, in her struggle with the serpent that continues to her glorification at the end of the age; 2) the Church in the time of Christ when, bound together, they battle the serpent with the shared weapons of purity and exemption from sin; and 3) the Church after Christ, when at the foot of the cross the Lord Jesus entrusts to her the members of his mystical body to stand with them in the victory over death, the “last enemy” (Journet, 34). In this perspective, the Immaculate Conception serves as the icon for hope and faithful perseverance until the triumphant return of Christ. German dogmatic theologian, Karl Rahner (1904-1984) sought the nucleus of Marian doctrine, aware of their historical and cultural contexts and examining them for what was eternally valid (Vorgrimler, 91). Through his anthropological lens of human freedom and responsibility and self-determination, Rahner saw in the Immaculate Conception Mary’s sign to the world of the graced human person with an inner orientation toward the divine and with the human capacity for the self-communication of God (Dallavalle, 265). In her book, Christianity & Feminism in Conversation, Regina Coll cites Sr. Carol Frances Jagen, B.V.M., who reflects on Mary as patron of the United States of America and on the popular image of Mary as the woman of Genesis, Chapter 3, who crushes the head of the serpent with her heel. Expanding the personal image to a societal one, Jagen asks if the image of the Immaculate Conception could be our symbol of freedom unbound by sin and calling us to the struggle for justice and peace (Coll, 96). American philosopher, Beatrice Bruteau, using the images from Lourdes—the Lady and the spring—sees the Immaculate Conception as the archetype for the revelation that each person possesses a true and unblemished nature (as opposed to the nature of original sin). For her, the Immaculate Conception is the archetype of the eternally “free-flowing” grace of God and the sharing of divine life that forms one’s personhood, transcending sin and upholding one’s human dignity (Bruteau, 181-195). Rahner emphasized keeping in mind historical and cultural contexts when mining Marian doctrine for its eternal validity. When the doctrine of the Immaculate Conception was announced in 1854, the Western world had entered the “Age of Enlightenment.” It had left the medieval era where religion informed every aspect of life and was now rejecting God’s influence in people’s lives and religion’s hold on humankind’s view of the world. God had become secondary to science and reason. Narcissism reigned and awareness of sin waned (Streeter). Thus, the Immaculate Conception and her partnership with Christ in overcoming evil was a call to the world to recognize the true source of strength and wisdom. While its truth is being mined today with the new tools of psychology, the light of its initial interpretation still shines on the 21st century. The fact that its development spanned the longest time in the history of the Church suggest that it may be the most profound dogma ever proclaimed by the magisterium and that it holds centuries more of deposits yet to be discovered by the hearts and minds of the faithful. Works Cited (All scripture quotations are from the New American Bible, Oxford University Press, 1990.) Balic, Carlo, O.F.M. “The Mediaeval Controversy over the Immaculate Conception up to the Death of Scotus.” In The Dogma of the Immaculate Conception, edited by Edward O’Connor, 162-163, 168, 186-192, 204-205, 207. Notre Dame, Indiana: Notre Dame Press, 1958:161-212. Bevans, Steven. An Introduction to Theology in Global Perspective. Maryknoll, New York: Orbis Books, 2009. Bouman. Cornelius A. “The Immaculate Conception in the Liturgy.” In The Dogma of the Immaculate Conception, edited by Edward O’Connor, 123-125. Notre Dame, Indiana: Notre Dame Press, 1958:113-160. Bruteau, Beatrice. “The Immaculate Conception: Our Original Face.” Cross Currents 39 (Summer 1989): 181-195. Coll, Regina A. Christianity & Feminism in Conversation. Mystic, CT: Twenty-Third Publications, 2001. Dallavalle, Nancy. “Feminist Theologies.” In The Cambridge Companion to Karl Rahner, edited by Declan Marmion and Mary E. Hines, 265. Cambridge, New York: Cambridge University Press, 2005:264-278. Dvornik, Francis. “The Byzantine Church and the Immaculate Conception.” In The Dogma of the Immaculate Conception, edited by Edward O’Connor, 90. Notre Dame, Indiana: Notre Dame Press, 1958:87-112. Jouassard, Georges. “The Fathers of the Church and the Immaculate Conception.” In The Dogma of the Immaculate Conception, edited by Edward O’Connor, 55-57, 68-74. Notre Dame, Indiana: Notre Dame Press, 1958:51-86. Journet, Charles. “Scripture and the Immaculate Conception: A Problem in the Evolution of Dogma.” In The Dogma of the Immaculate Conception, edited by Edward O’Connor, 34, 40, 43, 77-78. Notre Dame, Indiana: Notre Dame Press,1958:1-50. Laurentin, Rene. “The Role of the Papal Magisterium in the Development of the Dogma of the Immaculate Conception,” translated by Charles E. Sheedy, C.S.C. and Edward S. Shea, C.S.C. In The Dogma of the Immaculate Conception, edited by Edward O’Connor, 270, 274-278, 312. Notre Dame, Indiana: Notre Dame Press, 1958: 271-326. McBrien, Richard P. Catholicism: New Edition. New York: HarperCollins Publishers, 1994. O’Connor, Edward C.S.C. “Preface.” In The Dogma of the Immaculate Conception, edited by Edward O’Connor, vi. Notre Dame, Indiana: Notre Dame Press, 1958:v-xvi. Sebastian, Wenceslaus O.F.M. “The Controversy over the Immaculate Conception from after Scotus to the End of the Eighteenth Century.” In The Dogma of the Immaculate Conception, edited by Edward O’Connor, 214. Notre Dame, Indiana: Notre Dame Press, 1958:213-270. Streeter, Carla Mae, O.P. Outline, “World views. How Theological Reflection is Done.” Introduction to Theology and Theological Method, D503, Spring, 2011. United States Catholic Conference. Catechism of the Catholic Church. New York: Catholic Book Publishing Company Co, 1994. Vorgrimler, Herbert. Understanding Karl Rahner. New York: The Crossroad Publishing Company, 1986.   Jim Hubbman Wed, 06 Jul 2011 18:19:00 GMT f1397696-738c-4295-afcd-943feb885714:126 http://www.ai.edu/Resources/Blogs/AquinasMatters/tabid/216/articleType/ArticleView/articleId/89/Christian-Catholic-Spirituality.aspx#Comments 0 http://www.ai.edu/DesktopModules/DnnForge%20-%20NewsArticles/RssComments.aspx?TabID=216&ModuleID=743&ArticleID=89 http://www.ai.edu/DesktopModules/DnnForge%20-%20NewsArticles/Tracking/Trackback.aspx?ArticleID=89&PortalID=0&TabID=216 http://www.ai.edu/Resources/Blogs/AquinasMatters/tabid/216/articleType/ArticleView/articleId/89/Christian-Catholic-Spirituality.aspx A word that has become more and more common in religious writing and discussion in the last twenty-five years is “spirituality.” Writers in this field of study offer various definitions for spirituality, but a simple description that can be helpful in living the Christian life is to understand it as the way we put into practice what we believe; how we live our faith in the daily thoughts, words and actions of our lives. If we believe that we are called to love and forgive one another, how do we incorporate that belief in our human relationships, especially with the significant people in our lives? If we believe in the moral values of justice and charity, how do we bring those values into our work or professional lives? As we treat the other as we ourselves would like to be treated, we bring our faith and values into play in the experiences of our everyday lives. This simple way of understanding spirituality calls us to strive to bring congruence to our lives and thus to grow in authenticity and live our lives with increasing personal integrity. When we add the adjective “Christian” to spirituality it helps to define and describe that faith or set of beliefs that we are trying to put into practice in our lives. It is the teaching of Jesus Christ that forms our faith as Christians; it is what he taught us about who God is and how God wants us to live our life that is the very heart of our faith. The guidance of the Church helps us to apply Christ’s teachings to the present time and in the society and culture in which we live. American Christian spiritual writers like Thomas Merton and Henri Nouwen, Dorothy Day and Kathleen Norris have over the years helped Christians to weave together their faith and their daily lives. Christianity has always been a practical religion holding that what we believe and value must be useful in helping believers throughout their life-long pilgrimage, from birth to death. The totality of two thousand years of Christian wisdom is available to each of us as a resource for forming our expression of our living Christian spirituality. Although many Christian denominations hold beliefs in common (the centrality of Sacred Scripture, the divinity of Jesus Christ, the importance of the faith community as the Body of Christ ministering in the world, etc.) there are also differences in understanding and interpretation of the various tenets of Christianity. The distinctive teachings of the Roman Catholic Church, its unique tradition of practices and rituals, the very hierarchical structure of the Church are some examples of how the Catholic Church interprets and professes what is important to consider as we express our community’s faith and most importantly what is at the heart of living a Christian life in our denomination’s tradition. Catholics believe that regular participation in the Eucharist is essential to sustain one’s faith. Celebrating the Sacrament of Reconciliation with a community is also central to being able to grow in one’s relationship with God and our neighbor. Personal prayer as a way of communicating with God has been emphasized through the centuries as a key practice in the process of growing in holiness. These and many other teachings and customs form a valuable resource which is what is known as the guiding principles of Roman Catholic spirituality. Finally, each Roman Catholic Christian has to personalize his or her spirituality. This personalizing of spirituality takes place when we take into consideration the uniqueness of who we are as individuals. Knowing my personality, my gifts and limitations, my life goals, the significant relationships in my life, the vocation I am living, even my family of origin background has to be considered as I formulate the best way for me to live my faith in my daily life. This knowledge allows me to see more clearly what form of prayer is most beneficial to me. Because of my personality, I may be a person who is called to demonstrate boldly through public and prophetic expression what I believe about justice. As a married woman with young children, I may have to structure in some formal way, a time of solitude within my busy day to nourish my spiritual life. If I am someone who has struggled with an addiction and found a way to control it, I may be now in a position to offer my guidance and support to others who suffer from a similar addiction. These examples try to demonstrate how even as we accept a Roman Catholic interpretation of Christian spirituality, we still need to make it our own so that it fits with the person we truly are as we live our lives following the way of Jesus Christ. Spirituality, like the Sabbath, is made for us humans, not vice versa. We should explore our Christian spiritual tradition, especially as it has developed in the Roman Catholic community, so as to understand it as an important resource and support for our growth in our relationship with God and with our sisters and brothers. For in that growth comes a fuller understanding of who we are as individuals created in love and called to witness to the presence of God in the world. Harry M. Byrne, O.P. Aquinas Institute of Theology St. Louis, MO (First published in 2003; revised in 2010) SuperUser Account Tue, 14 Sep 2010 20:36:00 GMT f1397696-738c-4295-afcd-943feb885714:89 http://www.ai.edu/Resources/Blogs/AquinasMatters/tabid/216/articleType/ArticleView/articleId/91/A-Spirituality-of-Healing-Sacramental-Moments-for-the-Pilgrim-Spirit.aspx#Comments 0 http://www.ai.edu/DesktopModules/DnnForge%20-%20NewsArticles/RssComments.aspx?TabID=216&ModuleID=743&ArticleID=91 http://www.ai.edu/DesktopModules/DnnForge%20-%20NewsArticles/Tracking/Trackback.aspx?ArticleID=91&PortalID=0&TabID=216 http://www.ai.edu/Resources/Blogs/AquinasMatters/tabid/216/articleType/ArticleView/articleId/91/A-Spirituality-of-Healing-Sacramental-Moments-for-the-Pilgrim-Spirit.aspx A dynamic personal spirituality embraces those sacred moments when God enters into our lives to bring care and healing. Becoming aware of these occasions enables us to enrich and bring greater meaning to the pilgrimage that we call our faith life. Spirituality can be described as how we humans put into practice what we value and believe, in our hearts and minds, into our everyday lives. It is how we attempt to live out what is most important to us through our words and actions, within ourselves and in our relationships, in work and play. Christian spirituality is focused on the beliefs and values first taught by Jesus Christ through his proclamation of Good News (Gospel) and that has been handed down through the centuries in the Christian community (the Church) in the form of our living tradition of faith. The sacraments have been part of that tradition from the beginning in Jesus’ own ministry and have developed from his own words and actions into the special celebrations that we as Christians participate in communally as signs of our faith. It is particularly in the sacramental moment that we are empowered by the Holy Spirit, nourished by God’s love, to more fully live our Christian vocations. Healing plays a significant role in these sacramental celebrations and especially brings the grace of God into those areas of our lives that need to be healed and made whole again. The goal of healing is to help a person to be restored to wholeness. This is accomplished by guiding the person to move beyond his or her previous limiting condition to a new sense of self. The wholeness which pastoral sacramental healing seeks to bring about is not the simple restoration to one’s former state, but rather a healing and mending which hopefully enables the suffering person to integrate the realities of their condition into a new wholeness of self living in the world. Both in the experience of being healed and participating in the healing of others our own faith is deepened, our belief in the care and power of God who is with us every moment of our lives strengthens our commitment to follow the way of Jesus. With our personal Christian spirituality enriched, we can strive ever more faithfully to live what we have experienced for ourselves and so now believe. Harry M. Byrne, O.P. SuperUser Account Thu, 05 Aug 2010 20:40:00 GMT f1397696-738c-4295-afcd-943feb885714:91