1

S. Theol Home notes

Introduction:

Subject Matter: a study of the basic principles that govern the growth in holiness of
the Christian in the midst of the church in whatever calling.
Aim of Course: to help students in their own growth in holiness, taking their
particular callings in life into account and to enable them to offer helps to those who
will be in their care also and who will be called to other walks of life.
Method:
a. Overall plan – the descent of God to man in Christ and spirituality then as the
response of man in his effort to ascend to God in Christ.
b. Doctrinal - to study the basic principles of spiritual growth founded on
scripture and tradition.
c. Historical - to look at some of the writings of some of the spiritual masters
during the centuries, beginning with scripture and continuing up to Vatican II
to see how they exemplify the basic principles of spirituality.
d. Relevance in Practice -taking from what is old and proven in spirituality to
try to show its application in the present age, taking the different callings of
different people into account and the goal of the kingdom of God.

Sources: scripture and tradition and extracts from some of the great masters in
spirituality. Aumann J. Spiritual Theology, London, Sheed and Ward, 1980, will be
often referred to.

Reading: The Scriptures; The Documents of Vatican II, especially *Lumen Gentium
LG and later papal documents; The Didache; The Confessions of St Augustine; The
Rule of St Benedict; St Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologiae; Thomas A Kempis, The
Imitation of Christ; St Francis de Sales, Introduction to the Devout Life; St Theresa of
Avila, The Interior Castle; St Theresa of Lisseux, The Story of a Soul; St John XXIII,
The Journal of a Soul. *Aumann J. Christian Spirituality in the Catholic Tradition:
London, Sheed and Ward, 2001; Garrigou-Legrange, The Three Ages of the Interior
Life, St Louis, Herder, 1947. Murray P. Prayer in St Thomas; Other sources will be
mentioned as we go along.

I Opening Context – confusion today and the search for meaning

Teacher, what good must I do to have eternal life ? Mt 19:16

1“Influenced by such a variety of complexities, many of our contemporaries are kept

from accurately identifying permanent values and adjusting them properly to fresh
discoveries. As a result, buffeted between hope and anxiety and pressing one another
with questions about the present course of events, they are burdened down with
uneasiness. This same course of events leads men to look for answers; indeed, it
forces them to do so”. Gaudium et Spes #4
 2

Life has grown complex and fast for many today, disrupting old customs and
ways of life, raising false hopes but causing new problems. The result is
confusion, doubt, uncertainty and therefore the desire for something solid.

2 “Today's spiritual agitation and the changing conditions of life are part of a broader
and deeper revolution. As a result of the latter, intellectual formation is ever
increasingly based on the mathematical and natural sciences and on those dealing with
man himself, while in the practical order the technology which stems from these
sciences takes on mounting importance”. Gaudium et Spes #5

Maths and science and technology have taken over from faith and metaphysics.
But these things cant answer the deeper questions of life.

3 “It is not an exaggeration to say that man’s relationship to God and the demand for
a religious ‘experience’ are the crux of a profound crisis affecting the human spirit.
While the secularization of many aspects of life continues, there is a new quest for
‘spirituality’ as evidenced in the appearance of many religious and healing
movements which look to respond to the crisis of values in Western society. This
stirring of homo religiousus produces some positive and constructive results, such as
the search for new meaning in life, a new ecological sensitivity and the desire to go
beyond a cold, rationalist religiosity. On the other hand, this religious reawakening
includes some very ambiguous elements which are incompatible with the Christian
faith.” St. John Paul II, Ad limina of US bishops 1993.

Man’s relationship to God is still the deepest thing in him, so there is a search for
that today but the search, while it leads to some new good results, often leads to
other things and practices which are not good and take man even farther away
from God.

4 “The thirst for God and for an active meaningful relationship with Him is so strong
today that, where there is a lack of a genuine and full proclamation of the gospel of
Christ , there is a rising spread of forms of religiosity without God and the
proliferation of many sects”. St.Pope John Paul II, Pastores Dabo Vobis, #6.

The same thing: the thirst for God is ever stronger today but when it is not
satisfied by the true gospel in the one true church it leads to a whole lot of new
sects. There are already thousands of protestant sects in the world today, all
claiming Christ but all disagreeing with each other. That just adds to the
confusion.

5 “No one can escape from the fundamental questions: What must I do? How do I
distinguish good from evil? The answer is only possible thanks to the splendour of the
truth which shines forth deep within the human spirit, as the Psalmist bears witness:
"There are many who say: 'O that we might see some good! Let the light of your face
shine on us, O Lord' " (Ps 4:6). St. JPII, Veritatis Splendor #2

The fundamental questions of What must I do? How do I distinguish good from
evil?wont go away. They are there in the heart of every person who does not
smother them over with alcohol or drugs or diversion.
 3

Other Factors adding to man’s confusion:

1 Secularism: The growing secularism of the Western world, a world that is post
reformation, post enlightenment, post communism in which there is a loss of the sense
of God, a rejection of institutionalized religion, of dogma and traditional morals, but
where there is a rise in interest in spirituality at the same time and a growth of faith in
developing countries.
When God is cast aside man is confused.

2 Democractic Relativism: In the Western world monarchy is largely gone in the

sense of the monarch having the most power in a given state. The people, through
their elected representatives, now have great involvement in matters of state and so
also the laity have a greater role in the life of the church. Democracy gives each
person a vote on the grounds that all are equal. True. But this leads on to the idea that
all ideas are of the same truth value, which is false and inevitably a source of
confusion. The media then supply the answers which often times are secularist.

All have freedom of expression giving rise to the idea that one idea is as true as
another and that the catholic church is only one other mere opinion.

3 Technological Advances leading to a world view which is dynamic and forward

looking with more goods being produced to be enjoyed. But this begets the illusion
that material things by themselves will provide meaning and fulfilment which is
an illusion and a disappointment. This is materialism and the, disillusion it causes
often leads to despair so that we have a rise in addictions, suicide and general loss of
meaning. In other words, a world in which technological advance is cloaking moral
regression.

4 Globalization: the world is becoming a single field so that people in all parts can be
influenced by the same ideology. Nonetheless it is not a world united in one religious
belief because of religious division and atheism. That leads to much confusion and
religious soul searching.

5 Family Change: The breakdown of the traditional family and the re-defining of the
family in new ways. This makes it difficult to hand on spiritual beliefs or values. It
also leads to loneliness and insecurity and a search for the divine, but often in strange
ways.

II Sprituality – its nature

“You, therefore, must be perfect as your heavenly Father is perfect”. Mt 5:48.
“To all.....who are called to be saints”. Rom 1:7.
“It is God's will that you grow in holiness”. 1Thess. 4:3.

Spirituality Definitions :
 4

“In its widest sense, spirituality refers to any religious or ethical value that is
concretized as an attitude or spirit from which one's actions flow”. Jordan Aumann,
Spritual Theology, p16.

A very general definition.

Comment:

So people in the other religious traditions, those of the East like Hinduism and
Buddism, can have a spirituality of some sort. But our interest is in Christian, Catholic
spirituality.

D1 “Therefore in the Church, everyone whether belonging to the hierarchy, or being

cared for by it, is called to holiness, according to the saying of the Apostle: "For this
is the will of God, your sanctification". Lument Gentium, (LG) #39.

All are called to holiness even if their walks of life are different. It is not just for
priests or religious.

D2 “ 'If we live by the Spirit let us also walk by the Spirit' (Gal 5:25). In these words
the Apostle Paul reminds us that a Christian life is a 'spiritual life', that is, a life
enlivened and led by the Spirit towards holiness or the perfection of charity.” Pastores
Dabo Vobis #19. Cf also Christifideles Laici #16.

Too often the Holy Spirit is forgotten because He is the third person. But a holy
person can well be defined as someone led by the Holy Spirit just as Christ
Himself was.

D3 ‘Spirituality is “the life of man facing his God, participating in the life of God, the
spirit of man listening for the spirit of God”’. Aumann, Spritual Theology, p17,
(quoting P. Evdokimov).

Man facing God and participating in the life of God – another word for grace. So
spirituality is life lived in the grace of God.

D4 “Christian spirituality is therefore a participation in the mystery of Christ through

the interior life of grace, actuated by faith, charity and the other Christian virtues.”
Aumann, Spritual Theology, p18.

From grace come faith, hope and charity and the gifts of the Holy Spirit.

D5 Christian spirituality as “the living out in experience, through the whole course of
our lives, of the death -resurrection of Christ that we have been caught up into in
baptism.” Cussens D, Being a Priest Today p50.

Christ in His death and resurrection, His paschal mystery, is absolutely central
as we shall see. So spirituality can be defined as living out that mystery in our
lives.
 5

D6 “All Christian life, all holiness, is being by grace what Jesus is by nature: the
Son of God”. Marmion C. Christ in His Mysteries, Herder, 1924. p54-55.

D7 “Christian spirituality, even in its highest form, is the flowering in us of the

divine gifts which we received at baptism”. Marmion C. Christ the Ideal of the Priest.
p142.

Just to be baptised and receive grace and the gifts is not enough in itself to make
one a saint. This grace and virtues and gifts must flower in us, come to the full.

D8 “Holiness is more than a moral quality. It is the dwelling of God with men, of men
with God, the setting of 'God's tabernacle' with us and among us. Jn 1:14.” Mary is
the the great example. Ratzinger J. Pilgrim Fellowship of Faith, p 149ff.

Heroic virtue is indeed important and is looked for in the process of canonization
but that in turn presupposes the indwelling of God with men as in a tabernacle,
as in Mary most specially.

D9 “Spiritual theology is that part of theology that, proceeding from the truths of
divine revelation and the religious experience of individual persons, defines the
nature of the supernatural life, formulates directives for its growth and
development, and explains the process by which souls advance from the beginning of
the spiritual life to its full perfection.” Aumann, Spritual Theology, p22.

A good definition of what we will be trying to do.

Basis of Spirituality:

“Thus,on the one hand, as a creature he experiences his limitations in a multitude of

ways; on the other he feels himself to be boundless in his desires and summoned to a
higher life”. Vat II. Gaudium et Spes, (GS) #10.

“The thirst for God and for an active meaningful relationship with Him is so strong
today that, where there is a lack of a genuine and full proclamation of the gospel of
Christ , there is a rising spread of forms of religiosity without God and the
proliferation of many sects”. Pope John Paul II, Pastores Dabo Vobis, #6.

“...man is open to transcendence, to the absolute; he has a heart which is restless

until it rests in the Lord”. Pope John Paul II, Pastores Dabo Vobis, #45. (quoting
Augustine, Confessions).

“In Christ religion is no longer a 'blind search for God' (Acts 17:27) but the response
of faith to the God who reveals himself”. Tertio Millenio Adveniente #6.

At the basis of spirituality is man’s thirst for God, so well formulated by St

Augustine. Man is a being created by God, for God. So spirituality is not just an
added extra to other studies. It is fundamental to all of life. Otherwise we die of
despair if we cannot find this God. Spirituality then, in a word, is the church’s
answer to this thirst. So man’s search for God need not be a blind search in the
dark.
 6

Conclusions

1. Spirituality, as theory, is that branch of theology which studies the growth of

the soul in holiness, its progress to union with God. As practice it is applied
theology. It is theology lived by the individual Christian in accordance with the
supreme norm of morality: life in Christ with a view to the perfection of charity
in this life and the light of glory in the next..

2. From God’s side, which is prior, Christian spirituality sees God as thirsting for
man in His Son on the cross and calling for a response from man.

3. From man’s side spirituality is grounded in man’s awareness of his finitude so

that he desires the infinite, the transcendent. It is man as thirsting for the God.
Secularism denies a transcendent object and has man seek self transcendence
by his own powers. Eastern religions direct him to a transcendent goal
which is not a personal god. Indeed the goal is not truly transcendent if the
religion is pantheistic, i.e., if the god or supreme being does not have a separate
act of existence from that of the world.

4. When man does respond to God spirituality is communion with the Blessed
Trinity through and in Christ. It is the mystery of Christian existence under the
influence of the Holy Spirit. It is man's participation in the mysteries of the
faith. It is friendship with God lived in daily life. It is the imitation of Christ
in the carrying of the cross that leads to the resurrection. So, it has to be
Trinitarian and Christocentric.

5. In its subdivisions spirituality is comprised of ascetical and mystical theology,

the former treating of man's ascent to God, the latter of his union with God,
both of which are to be seen as one continuous movement, possible to all.

6. In its practice it calls for a spirit of detachment, penance and prayer, progress in
the keeping of the commandments and in virtue, in doing God’s will in
carrying out the duties of one’s calling in life, a living of the beatitudes, a
living of the mysteries of the faith in one’s calling, all motivated by Christian
charity under the impulse of the Holy Spirit. In sum, it is a call to be Christ-
like.

7. Though all Christians are called to spiritual life, there can be different
spiritualities depending on the differences of gifts given by the Holy Spirit
(Rom 12:4-6); on the different aspects of Christ's life which are emphasized; on
the needs of the church at a given time; on the native characteristics of
individuals or peoples. (Cf Aumann, Spirtual Theology, p33).

8. The religions of the East have a very different doctrinal basis to Catholicism
so, while we might learn some things from them, their spirituality is very
different and it is not possible to mix them with ours.

Danger of things like yoga and transcendental meditation.

 7

Why be spiritual at all ? Is it not enough to be moral ? Spirituality grounds moral

living in love of God and neighbour so as to arrive at union with God is its ultimate
goal. Also God, though He can work through any instrument, or even without any
instrument, usually does His wonders through those who are holy. Further, if priests
or religious have the task of leading their people to God it makes sense that they
themselves be close to Him to begin with.

If we know the goal, the end, the final cause of spirituality we can know the road, the
means, the other causes. Let us look at that first now.

III The Goal of Spirituality

O All ye works of the Lord O bless the Lord. To Him be highest glory and praise for
ever. Dan 3.

The glory of God. Ad magiorem Dei gloriam.

1Intrinsic glory: God lacks nothing. He is perfectly self sufficient in Himself from all
eternity. He is His own goodness and that is infinite. Because He is supremely
intelligent He acts for an end. But that end is not something outside of Himself,
otherwise He would somehow be subjecting Himself to that end. No. He is Himself
His own end in His own infinite goodness. He created the universe not out of any
need but rather to communicate His own goodness to creatures, to beings other than
Himself. This is because goodness tends to diffuse or communicate itself or give itself
away to others.

Extrinsic glory: when creatures respond to God by doing what He has laid down for
them to do according to their different natures then we can say that they glorify Him,
that they add to His extrinsic glory. Man, like the angels, is a being with intellect and
will and by God’s free gift he is called to union with God, that is, to have a share in
God’s own inner life and in His intrinsic glory. When he does so share in God’s inner
life that adds also to God’s extrinsic glory. If we were to posit something else other
than God’s glory as the ultimate goal of spirituality, for example, if we were to make
man’s own perfection to be that ultimate goal, spirituality would descend into being a
form of egoism, of selfishness.

If we do not insist on God Himself and His glory as the ultimate end of
spirituality and indeed of everything, our spirituality will soon descend into
selfishness, using God for our own happiness. If we do that we will neither have
God nor happiness. But if we put God first and forget about our own happiness
we will find both God and our own happiness. St Thomas was well aware that
the old pagan Greeks spoke of happiness as man’s last end. But St Thomas made
God to be the last end, the final cause, of life. Find Him and you find happiness
unknown to yourself.

But to give glory to God like that man needs first to be saved from sin – the result
of the Fall and for this he must be sanctified with healing grace. So, if God’s glory is
the ultimate aim of spirituality we can say that man’s salvation and sanctification
are the proximate goals leading to this.
 8

2 Our salvation: we are saved by Christ’s death and resurrection when He merited
heaven for us, when He made a perfect act of atonement for us, when He offered a
perfect sacrifice of Himself to the Father for us and redeemed us from sin and the
power of Satan. Cf St Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologiae III Q 48.

That salvation is channelled to us by means of the sacraments and the grace they give,
principally the mass, baptism, penance, anointing of the sick and indeed through all
the sacraments because they are all remedies for sin in one way or another. But we
have to do our part in avoiding sin, doing penance, forming good habits and living a
virtuous life.

Get rid of sin first and then you can talk about sanctification – becoming holy.
Otherwise you are trying to use grace to cover over the mud of your sins. In
other words the first task of grace is to remove sin and then lift us up to God.

3 Our sanctification: the grace of Christ takes away sin and heals us of its effects and
it also transforms us and elevates our nature to making us friends of God. Grace in
this life blossoms into glory in the next life when all imperfections have been purified
either in this life or in purgatory. That life of glory is a life of union with God in
Christ. It is the beatific vision when we see God “face to face”, immediately. That is
not possible in this life but some holy people do have mystical experiences which are
a foretaste on earth of this union with God in the next life. We, for our part, must co-
operate with grace and remove the obstacles to grace so that union with God, which is
a gift from God, can come to be.

This vision of God, the beatific vision, is a vision of the Trinity for the obvious reason
that God is one nature in three persons, Father, Son and Holy Spirit. Christ is the
second person of the Trinity become man for our salvation.

It should also be clear from the above that the grace which heals us and lifts us up to
union with God comes from Christ and His paschal mystery. He is absolutely central
to Christian spirituality and to everything relating to our faith. Hence we must look
first at the Trinity and at Him and try to answer the question He Himself once put to
His apostles as to who He was. If our Christology is not correct neither will our
spirituality or any in our faith.

Comment:

Man’s End: “Why did God make man ? God made man to know, love and
serve Him in this life and by this means to be happy with Him for ever in
heaven”. School Catechism of Trent.
All that came forth from God by creation has the one purpose of returning to
Him again according to its nature. Man, and the angels, by a union of
knowledge and love, which, as we saw, has the ultimate end of the glory of
God.

Lesson for Spirituality:

To make the glory of God our goal because otherwise we become our own false gods
living for ourselves, even trying to be holy for our own glory and the spiritual
 9

consolations it may bring. To glorify God requires that, with the help of His grace, we
turn from sin and grow in holiness.

Reading:
Jordan Aumann, Spiritual Theology, Chs 1& 2.

The goal of spirituality is the vision of the Trinity in the next life and the life of grace which
prepares for it in this life. Absolutely central to this is the person of Christ who is one of the
persons of the Trinity who became one of us also. There is also Mary, His mother, in her role of
mediatrix of His grace to us and there is the church with its sacraments through which this
grace normally comes to us. We must now look at these in turn. We will begin on high with the
Trinity and see how the Son descended to become “a man like us in all things but sin” to
redeem us from sin. This we will call the “Descent” . Then we will look on spirituality as our
response to that and we will call it the “Ascent” of the soul to God.

If we do not start with the descent, but only with our ascent, then we will not have the idea of
God first loving us, or of the gratuity of it all beginning from God’s side. We will be like Easterns
or pelagians doing it all from our side.

The Descent

The Blessed Trinity

Go teach all nations. Baptize them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the
Holy Spirit. Mt 28.

Holy Father, keep them in your name, which you have given me, that they may be one,
even as we are one ……even as you, Father, are in me, and I in you, that they may be
in us, so that the world may believe that you have sent me. Jn 17:11,21.

“The mystery of the Most Holy Trinity is the central mystery of the Christian faith
and life. It is the mystery of God in himself. It is therefore the source of all the other
mysteries of the faith, the light that enlightens them.” CCC #234.

Explain the two processions.

“God from God, light from light, true God from true God, begotten, not made, of one
substance with the Father……I believe in the Holy Spirit, Lord and giver of life who
proceeds from the Father and the Son; who with the Father and the Son is to be
adored and glorified”. Nicean Creed.

“It is within the church’s mystery, as a mystery of Trinitarian communion in

missionary tension, that every Christian identity is revealed….St John Paul II,
Pastores Dabo Vobis #12.

All different vocations can be related up to the Trinity. Eg husband and wife and
child in the family. The priest on mission.

“May they have the vision of the Trinity for all eternity”. Old Irish prayer for the
dead.
 10

Comment:

1 God is eternally self giving within Himself so that the Father gives Himself
to the Son and from the two, from their mutual love, there comes the Holy
Spirit. These are the two “processions”, the first resulting from God’s self
knowledge and the second from His love.

2 All things have their origin in the Trinity being created by the Father,
through the Son by the love of the Holy Spirit.

3 The koinonia, communio of love within the Trinity is reflected in the

community of love between Christians also here on earth because the
second person of the Trinity became one of us in Christ.

4 The end goal for us is to have a share in the inner life and love of the Trinity
in the next life.

Lesson for Spirituality:

Christians should pray to the Trinity, to the Father through the Son in the Holy Spirit
and love each other in a way that their communion with each other on earth will be a
true reflection of that of the Trinity in heaven for all men to see.

This communion then is no mere comradeship of a shallow kind.

Reading:
Catechism of the Catholic Church CCC #232ff.

The Centrality of Christ

Who do men say that I am? You are the Christ the Son of the living God. Mt 16.

He who sees me sees the Father. I and the Father are one.
“Though he was in the form of God Jesus did not count equality with God a thing to
be grasped but he emptied himself, taking the form of a slave and became as men are,
and being as all men are was humbler yet, even to accepting death on a cross”.
Phil.2:6-9.

There is one mediator between God and men, the man Jesus Christ who gave Himself
as a ransom for us all. I Tim 2:5-6.

God gave us eternal life, and this life is in His Son. Whoever possesses the Son
possesses life; whoever does not possess the Son of God does not possess life. I Jn
5:11-12.

Christ: the Light of the World

“Jesus Christ, the "light of the nations", shines upon the face of his Church, which he
sends forth to the whole world to proclaim the Gospel to every creature (cf. Mk
16:15).2 Hence the Church, as the People of God among the nations,3 while attentive
 11

to the new challenges of history and to mankind's efforts to discover the meaning of
life, offers to everyone the answer which comes from the truth about Jesus Christ and
his Gospel”. St. JPII, Veritatis Splendor #2.

In the introduction above JPII outlined the confusion in man today. In this quote
he is putting forward Christ as the light that dispels that confusion. Christ is the
light, the answer, to all the confusion. He spent his whole life preaching this on
his many travels.

Christ: One Person in two Natures

“The unique and altogether singular event of the Incarnation of the Son of God does
not mean that Jesus Christ is part God and part man, nor does it imply that He is the
result of a confused mixture of the divine and the human. He became truly man while
remaining truly God. Jesus Christ is true God and true man. During the first centuries,
the church had to defend this truth of faith against the heresies that falsified it”.
Catechism of the Catholic Church #464

Explain Chalcedon here.

Background[edit]
In 325, the first ecumenical council (First Council of Nicaea) determined that Jesus Christ was God,
"consubstantial" with the Father, and rejected the Arian contention that Jesus was a created being. This
was reaffirmed at the First Council of Constantinople (381) and the Council of Ephesus (431).
Eutychian controversy[edit]
Main article: Eutyches
About two years after Cyril of Alexandria's death in 444, an aged monk from Constantinople
named Eutyches began teaching a subtle variation on the traditional Christology in an attempt to stop
what he saw as a new outbreak of Nestorianism.[4] He claimed to be a faithful follower of Cyril's
teaching, which was declared orthodox in the Union of 433.
Cyril had taught that "There is only one physis, since it is the Incarnation, of God the Word." Cyril had
apparently understood the Greekword physis to mean approximately what
the Latin word persona (person) means, while most Greek theologians would have interpreted that
word to mean natura (nature). The energy and imprudence with which Eutyches asserted his opinions
led to his being misunderstood. Thus, many understood Eutyches to be advocating Docetism, a sort of
reversal of Arianism —where Arius had denied the consubstantial divinity of Jesus, Eutyches seemed
to be denying that Jesus was fully human.[4] Pope Leo I wrote that Eutyches' error seemed to be more
from a lack of skill than from malice.
Eutyches had been accusing various personages of covert Nestorianism. In November 448, Flavian,
Bishop of Constantinople held a local synod regarding a point of discipline connected with the
province of Sardis. At the end of the session of this synod one of those inculpated, Eusebius, Bishop of
Dorylaeum, brought a counter charge of heresy against the archimandrite.[5] Eusebius demanded that
Eutyches be removed from office. Flavian preferred that the bishop and the archimandrite sort out their
differences, but as his suggestion went unheeded, Eutyches was summoned to clarify his position
regarding the nature of Christ. Eventually Eutyches reluctantly appeared, but his position was
considered to be theologically unsophisticated, and the synod finding his answers unresponsive
condemned and exiled him.[4] Flavian sent a full account to Pope Leo I. Although it had been
accidentally delayed, Leo wrote a compendious explanation of the whole doctrine involved, and sent it
to Flavian as a formal and authoritative decision of the question.[6]
Eutyches appealed against the decision, labeling Flavian a Nestorian, and received the support of Pope
Dioscorus I of Alexandria. John Anthony McGuckin sees an "innate rivalry" between the Sees of
 12

Alexandria and Constantinople.[7] Dioscurus, imitating his predecessors in assuming a primacy over

Constantinople, held his own synod which annulled the sentence of Flavian, and absolved Eutyches.
"Latrocinium" of Ephesus[edit]
Main article: Second Council of Ephesus
Through the influence of the court official Chrysaphius, godson of Eutyches, in 449, the competing
claims between the Patriarchs of Constantinople and Alexandria led Emperor Theodosius II to call
a council which was held in Ephesus in 449,[8] with Dioscorus presiding.
Pope Leo sent four legates to represent him and expressed his regret that the shortness of the notice
must prevent the presence of any other bishop of the West.[6] He provided his legates, one of whom
died en route, with a letter addressed to Flavian explaining Rome's position in the controversy. Leo's
letter, now known as Leo's Tome, confessed that Christ had two natures, and was not of or from two
natures.[9]
On August 8, 449 the Second Council of Ephesus began its first session. The Acts of the first session of
this synod were read at the Council of Chalcedon, 451, and are thus preserved. The remainder of the
Acts (the first session being wanting) are known through a Syriac translation by a Monophysite monk,
written in the year 535 and published from a manuscript in the British Museum.[10]Nonetheless, there
are somewhat different interpretations as to what actually transpired. The question before the council
by order of the emperor was whether Flavian, in a synod held by him at Constantinople in November,
448, had justly deposed and excommunicated the Archimandrite Eutyches for refusing to admit two
natures in Christ.
Dioscorus began the council by banning all members of the November 448 synod which had deposed
Eutyches from sitting as judges. He then introduced Eutyches who publicly professed that while Christ
had two natures before the incarnation, the two natures had merged to form a single nature after the
incarnation. Of the 130 assembled bishops, 111 voted to rehabilitate Eutyches.
Throughout these proceedings, Hilary (one of the papal legates) repeatedly called for the reading of
Leo's Tome, but was ignored. The Eastern Orthodox Church has very different accounts of The Second
Council of Ephesus. Pope Dioscorus requested deferring reading of Leo's Tome, as it was not seen as
necessary to start with, and could be read later. This was seen as a rebuke to the representatives from
the Church of Rome not reading the Tome from the start.
Dioscorus then moved to depose Flavian of Constantinople and Eusebius of Dorylaeum on the grounds
that they taught the Word had been made flesh and not just assumed flesh from the Virgin and that
Christ had two natures. When Flavian and Hilary objected, Dioscorus called for a pro-monophysite
mob to enter the church which assaulted Flavian as he clung to the altar. Flavian died three days later.
Dioscorus then placed Eusebius of Dorylaeum under arrest and demanded the assembled bishops
approve his actions. Fearing the mob, they all did. The papal legates refused to attend the second
session at which several more orthodox bishops were deposed, including Ibas of Edessa, Irenaeus of
Tyre, Domnus of Antioch, and Theodoret. Dioscorus then had Cyril of Alexandria's Twelve Anathemas
declared orthodox[11] with the intent of condemning any confession other than one nature in Christ.
According to a letter to the Empress Pulcheria collected among the letters of Leo I, Hilary apologized
for not delivering to her the pope's letter after the synod, but owing to Dioscurus, who tried to hinder
his going either to Rome or to Constantinople, he had great difficulty in making his escape in order to
bring to the pontiff the news of the result of the council.[12] Hilary, who later became pope and
dedicated an oratory in the Lateran Basilica in thanks for his life,[13] managed to escape from
Constantinople and brought news of the council to Leo who immediately dubbed it a "synod of
robbers"—Latrocinium—and refused to accept its pronouncements. The decisions of this council now
threatened schism between the East and the West.
The claims that bishops being forced to approve actions, were challenged by Pope Dioscorus and the
Egyptian Bishops at Chalcedon.

Convocation and session[edit]

The situation continued to deteriorate, with Leo demanding the convocation of a new council and
Emperor Theodosius II refusing to budge, all the while appointing bishops in agreement with
Dioscorus. All this changed dramatically with the Emperor's death and the elevation of Marcian, an
orthodox Christian, to the imperial throne. To resolve the simmering tensions, Marcian announced his
intention to hold a new council to set aside the 449 Second Council of Ephesus which was named the
 13

"Latrocinium"[14] or "Robber Council" by Pope Leo. Pulcheria, the sister of Theodosius, may have
influenced this decision, or even made the convention of a council a requirement during her
negotiations with Aspar, the magister militum, to marry Marcian.
Leo had pressed for it to take place in Italy, but Emperor Marcian instead called for it to convene at
Chalcedon, because it was closer to Constantinople, and would thus allow him to respond quickly to
any events along the Danube, which was being raided by the Huns under Attila.
The council opened on October 8, 451. Marcian had the bishops deposed by Dioscorus returned to their
dioceses and had the body of Flavian brought to the capital to be buried honorably. The Emperor asked
Leo to preside over the council, but Leo again chose to send legates in his place. This time, Bishops
Paschasinus of Lilybaeum and Julian of Cos and two priests Boniface and Basil represented the
western church at the council. The council was attended by about 520 bishops or their representatives
and was the largest and best-documented of the first seven ecumenical councils.[15] All the sessions
were held in the church of St. Euphemia, Martyr, outside the city and directly opposite Constantinople.
As to the number of sessions held by the Council of Chalcedon there is a great discrepancy in the
various texts of the Acts, also in the ancient historians of the council. Either the respective manuscripts
must have been incomplete; or the historians passed over in silence several sessions held for secondary
purposes. According to the deacon Rusticus, there were in all sixteen sessions; this division is
commonly accepted by scholars, including Karl Josef von Hefele, an historian of the councils. If all the
separate meetings were counted, there would be twenty-one sessions; several of these meetings,
however, are considered as supplementary to preceding sessions.[1]
Paschasinus refused to give Dioscorus (who had excommunicated Leo leading up to the council) a seat
at the council. As a result, he was moved to the nave of the church. Paschasinus further ordered the
reinstatement of Theodoret and that he be given a seat, but this move caused such an uproar among the
council fathers, that Theodoret also sat in the nave, though he was given a vote in the proceedings,
which began with a trial of Dioscorus.
Marcian wished to bring proceedings to a speedy end, and asked the council to make a pronouncement
on the doctrine of the Incarnation before continuing the trial. The council fathers, however, felt that no
new creed was necessary, and that the doctrine had been laid out clearly in Leo's Tome. [9] They were
also hesitant to write a new creed as the First Council of Ephesus had forbidden the composition or use
of any new creed. Aetius, deacon of Constantinople then read Cyril's letter to Nestorius, and a second
letter to John of Antioch. The bishops responded, "We all so believe: Pope Leo thus believes ... we all
thus believe. As Cyril so believe we, all of us: eternal be the memory of Cyril: as the epistles of Cyril
teach such is our mind, such has been our faith: such is our faith: this is the mind of Archbishop Leo, so
he believes, so he has written."[16]
Beronician, clerk of the consistory, then read from a book handed him by Aetius, the synodical letter of
Leo to Flavian (Leo's Tome). After the reading of the letter, the bishops cried out: This is the faith of
the fathers, this is the faith of the Apostles. So we all believe, thus the orthodox believe. ...Peter has
spoken thus through Leo. So taught the Apostles. Piously and truly did Leo teach, so taught Cyril.
Everlasting be the memory of Cyril. Leo and Cyril taught the same thing, ...This is the true faith...This
is the faith of the fathers. Why were not these things read at Ephesus?"[16]
However, during the reading of Leo's Tome, three passages were challenged as being potentially
Nestorian, and their orthodoxy was defended by using the writings of Cyril.[17] Due to such concerns,
the council decided to adjourn and appoint a special committee to investigate the orthodoxy of Leo's
Tome, judging it by the standard of Cyril's Twelve Chapters, as some of the bishops present raised
concerns about their compatibility. This committee was headed by Anatolius, Patriarch of
Constantinople, and was given five days to carefully study the matter. The committee unanimously
decided in favor of the orthodoxy of Leo, determining that what he said was compatible with the
teaching of Cyril. A number of other bishops also entered statements to the effect that they believed
that Leo's Tome was not in contradiction with the teaching of Cyril as well. [17]
The council continued with Dioscorus' trial, but he refused to appear before the assembly. However,
historical accounts from the Eastern Orthodox Church note that Dioscorus was put under solitary arrest.
As a result, he was condemned, but by an underwhelming amount (more than half the bishops present
for the previous sessions did not attend his condemnation), and all of his decrees were declared null.
Empress Pulcheria (Marcian's wife) told Dioscorus "In my father's time, there was a man who was
stubborn (referring to St. John Chrysostom) and you are aware of what was made of him", to which
Dioscorus famously responded "And you may recall that your mother prayed at his tomb, as she was
 14

bleeding of sickness". Pulcheria is said to have slapped Dioscorus in the face, breaking some of his
teeth, and ordered the guards to confine him, which they did pulling his beard hair. Dioscorus is said to
have put these in a box and sent them back to his Church in Alexandria noting "this is the fruit of my
faith"[18][19]. Marcian responded by exiling Dioscorus.
All of the bishops were then asked to sign their assent to the Tome, but a group of thirteen Egyptians
refused, saying that they would assent to "the traditional faith". As a result, the Emperor's
commissioners decided that a credo would indeed be necessary and presented a text to the fathers. No
consensus was reached. Paschasinus threatened to return to Rome to reassemble the council in Italy.
Marcian agreed, saying that if a clause were not added to the credo, the bishops would have to relocate.
The Committee then sat in the oratory of the most holy martyr Euphemis and afterwards reported a
definition of faith which while teaching the same doctrine was not the Tome of Leo. [20]
Although it could be reconciled with Cyril's Formula of Reunion, it was not compatible in its wording
with Cyril's Twelve Anathemas. In particular, the third anathema reads: "If anyone divides in the one
Christ the hypostases after the union, joining them only by a conjunction of dignity or authority or
power, and not rather by a coming together in a union by nature, let him be anathema." This appeared
to some to be incompatible with Leo's definition of two natures hypostatically joined. However, the
council would determine (with the exception of 13 Egyptian bishops) that this was an issue of wording
and not of doctrine; a committee of bishops appointed to study the orthodoxy of the Tome using Cyril's
letters (which included the twelve anathemas) as their criteria unanimously determined it to be
orthodox, and the council, with few exceptions, supported this.[clarification needed][21]
It approved the creed of Nicaea (325), the creed of Constantinople (381; subsequently known as the
Nicene Creed), two letters of Cyril against Nestorius, which insisted on the unity of divine and human
persons in Christ, and the Tome of Pope Leo I confirming two distinct natures in Christ.[15]

Acceptance[edit]
The dogmatic definitions of the council are recognized as normative by the Eastern
Orthodox and Catholic Churches, as well by certain other Western Churches; also,
most Protestants agree that the council's teachings regarding the Trinity and the Incarnation are
orthodox doctrine which must be adhered to. The council, however, is rejected by the Assyrian Church
of the East and the Oriental Orthodox Churches, the latter teaching rather that "The Lord Jesus Christ is
God the Incarnate Word. He possesses the perfect Godhead and the perfect manhood. His fully divine
nature is united with His fully human nature yet without mixing, blending or alteration." [22] The
Oriental Orthodox contend that this latter teaching has been misunderstood as monophysitism, an
appellation with which they strongly disagree but, nevertheless, refuse to accept the decrees of the
council, likely as a result of the conduct and the proceedings of the Council. The Eastern Orthodox
Churches have, and continue to view the Council as a power struggle by the Church of Rome, given the
prominence in theology, spirituality of the Oriental Orthodox Churches in the Early Church and during
the first ecumenical councils.
Many Anglicans and most Protestants consider it to be the last authoritative ecumenical council.
[23]
 These churches, along with Martin Luther, hold that both conscience and scripture preempt doctrinal
councils and generally agree that the conclusions of later councils were unsupported by or
contradictory to scripture.[24]
Results[edit]
The Council of Chalcedon issued the Chalcedonian Definition, which repudiated the notion of a single
nature in Christ, and declared that he has two natures in one person and hypostasis. It also insisted on
the completeness of his two natures: Godhead and manhood.[25] The council also issued 27 disciplinary
canons governing church administration and authority. In a further decree, later known as canon 28, the
bishops declared that the See of Constantinople (New Rome) had the patriarchal status with "equal
privileges" ("τῶν ἴσων ἀπολαύουσαν" in Greek, "aequalibus privilegiis" in Latin) to the See of Rome.
[26][27][28][29]
 No reference was made in Canon 28 to the bishops of Rome or Constantinople having their
authority from being successors to Peter or Andrew respectively. Instead, the stated reasons in the
actual text of the Canon that the episcopacy of these cities had been granted their status was the
importance of these cities as major cities of the empire of the time. [26][a]
Confession of Chalcedon[edit]
Main article: Chalcedonian Definition
 15

The Confession of Chalcedon provides a clear statement on the two natures of Christ, human and
divine:[30]
We, then, following the holy Fathers, all with one consent, teach people to confess one and the same
Son, our Lord Jesus Christ, the same perfect in Godhead and also perfect in manhood; truly God and
truly man, of a reasonable [rational] soul and body; consubstantial [co-essential] with the Father
according to the Godhead, and consubstantial with us according to the Manhood; in all things like unto
us, without sin; begotten before all ages of the Father according to the Godhead, and in these latter
days, for us and for our salvation, born of the Virgin Mary, the Mother of God, according to the
Manhood; one and the same Christ, Son, Lord, only begotten, to be acknowledged in two natures,
inconfusedly, unchangeably, indivisibly, inseparably; (ἐν δύο φύσεσιν ἀσυγχύτως, ἀτρέπτως,
ἀδιαιρέτως, ἀχωρίστως – in duabus naturis inconfuse, immutabiliter, indivise, inseparabiliter) the
distinction of natures being by no means taken away by the union, but rather the property of each
nature being preserved, and concurring in one Person (prosopon) and one Subsistence (hypostasis), not
parted or divided into two persons, but one and the same Son, and only begotten God (μονογενῆ Θεόν),
the Word, the Lord Jesus Christ; as the prophets from the beginning [have declared] concerning Him,
and the Lord Jesus Christ Himself has taught us, and the Creed of the holy Fathers has handed down to
us.
The full text of the definition which reaffirms the decisions of the Council of Ephesus, the pre-
eminence of the Creed of Nicea (325).[b] It also canonises as authoritative two of Cyril of Alexandria's
letters and the Tome of Leo written against Eutyches and sent to Archbishop Flavian of
Constantinople in 449.
Canons[edit]
The work of the council was completed by a series of 30 disciplinary canons the Ancient Epitomes of
which are:[9]

1. The canons of every Synod of the holy Fathers shall be observed.

2. Whoso buys or sells an ordination, down to a Prosmonarius, shall be in danger of losing his
grade. Such shall also be the case with go-betweens, if they be clerics they shall be cut off
from their rank, if laymen or monks, they shall be anathematized.
3. Those who assume the care of secular houses should be corrected, unless perchance the law
called them to the administration of those not yet come of age, from which there is no
exemption. Unless further their Bishop permits them to take care of orphans and widows.
4. Domestic oratories and monasteries are not to be erected contrary to the judgment of the
bishop. Every monk must be subject to his bishop, and must not leave his house except at his
suggestion. A slave, however, can not enter the monastic life without the consent of his
master.
5. Those who go from city to city shall be subject to the canon law on the subject.
6. In Martyries and Monasteries ordinations are strictly forbidden. Should any one be ordained
therein, his ordination shall be reputed of no effect.
7. If any cleric or monk arrogantly affects the military or any other dignity, let him be cursed.
8. Any clergyman in an almshouse or monastery must submit himself to the authority of the
bishop of the city. But he who rebels against this let him pay the penalty.
9. Litigious clerics shall be punished according to canon, if they despise the episcopal and resort
to the secular tribunal. When a cleric has a contention with a bishop let him wait till the synod
sits, and if a bishop have a contention with his metropolitan let him carry the case to
Constantinople.
10. No cleric shall be recorded on the clergy-list of the churches of two cities. But if he shall have
strayed forth, let him be returned to his former place. But if he has been transferred, let him
have no share in the affairs of his former church.
11. Let the poor who stand in need of help make their journey with letters pacificatory and not
commendatory: For letters commendatory should only be given to those who are open to
suspicion.
12. One province shall not be cut into two. Whoever shall do this shall be cast out of the
episcopate. Such cities as are cut off by imperial rescript shall enjoy only the honour of
having a bishop settled in them: but all the rights pertaining to the true metropolis shall be
preserved.
13. No cleric shall be received to communion in another city without a letter commendatory.
 16

14. A Cantor or Lector alien to the sound faith, if being then married, he shall have begotten
children let him bring them to communion, if they had there been baptized. But if they had
not yet been baptized they shall not be baptized afterwards by the heretics.
15. No person shall be ordained deaconess except she be forty years of age. If she shall dishonour
her ministry by contracting a marriage, let her be anathema.
16. Monks or nuns shall not contract marriage, and if they do so let them be excommunicated.
17. Village and rural parishes if they have been possessed for thirty years, they shall so continue.
But if within that time, the matter shall be subject to adjudication. But if by the command of
the Emperor a city be renewed, the order of ecclesiastical parishes shall follow the civil and
public forms.
18. Clerics and Monks, if they shall have dared to hold conventicles and to conspire against the
bishop, shall be cast out of their rank.
19. Twice each year the Synod shall be held wherever the bishop of the Metropolis shall
designate, and all matters of pressing interest shall be determined.
20. A clergyman of one city shall not be given a cure in another. But if he has been driven from
his native place and shall go into another he shall be without blame. If any bishop receives
clergymen from without his diocese he shall be excommunicated as well as the cleric he
receives.
21. A cleric or layman making charges rashly against his bishop shall not be received.
22. Whoever seizes the goods of his deceased bishop shall be cast forth from his rank.
23. Clerics or monks who spend much time at Constantinople contrary to the will of their bishop,
and stir up seditions, shall be cast out of the city.
24. A monastery erected with the consent of the bishop shall be immovable. And whatever
pertains to it shall not be alienated. Whoever shall take upon him to do otherwise, shall not be
held guiltless.
25. Let the ordination of bishops be within three months: necessity however may make the time
longer. But if anyone shall ordain counter to this decree, he shall be liable to punishment. The
revenue shall remain with the œconomus.
26. The œconomus in all churches must be chosen from the clergy. And the bishop who neglects
to do this is not without blame.
27. If a clergyman elope with a woman, let him be expelled from the Church. If a layman, let him
be anathema. The same shall be the lot of any that assist him.
28. The bishop of New Rome (Constantinople) shall enjoy the same privileges as the bishop of
Old Rome, on account of the removal of the Empire. For this reason the [metropolitans] of
Pontus, of Asia, and of Thrace, as well as the Barbarian bishops shall be ordained by the
bishop of Constantinople.
29. He is sacrilegious who degrades a bishop to the rank of a presbyter. For he that is guilty of
crime is unworthy of the priesthood. But he that was deposed without cause, let him be [still]
bishop.
30. It is the custom of the Egyptians that none subscribe without the permission of their
Archbishop. Wherefore they are not to be blamed who did not subscribe the Epistle of the
holy Leo until an Archbishop had been appointed for them.

Canon 28 grants equal privileges (isa presbeia) to Constantinople as of Rome because Constantinople
is the New Rome as renewed by canon 36 of the Quinisext Council. Pope Leodeclared the canon 28
null and void and only approved the canons of the council which were pertaining to faith.[31][32] The
“Holy, Great and Universal Council” simply addressed the bishop of Rome as "Archbishop Leo".[33][34]
[35]

According to some ancient Greek collections, canons 29 and 30 are attributed to the council: canon 29,
which states that an unworthy bishop cannot be demoted but can be removed, is an extract from the
minutes of the 19th session; canon 30, which grants the Egyptians time to consider their rejection of
Leo's Tome, is an extract from the minutes of the fourth session.[36]
In all likelihood an official record of the proceedings was made either during the council itself or
shortly afterwards. The assembled bishops informed the pope that a copy of all the "Acta" would be
transmitted to him; in March, 453, Pope Leo commissioned Julian of Cos, then at Constantinople, to
make a collection of all the Acts and translate them into Latin. Most of the documents, chiefly the
minutes of the sessions, were written in Greek; others, e.g. the imperial letters, were issued in both
languages; others, again, e.g. the papal letters, were written in Latin. Eventually nearly all of them were
translated into both languages.[31]
 17

The status of the sees of Constantinople and Jerusalem[edit]

The status of Jerusalem[edit]
See also: Jerusalem in Christianity
The metropolitan of Jerusalem was given independence from the metropolitan of Antioch and from any
other higher-ranking bishop, given what is now known as autocephaly, in the council's seventh session
whose "Decree on the Jurisdiction of Jerusalem and Antioch" contains: "the bishop of Jerusalem, or
rather the most holy Church which is under him, shall have under his own power the three Palestines".
[9]
 This led to Jerusalem becoming a patriarchate, one of the five patriarchates known as the pentarchy,
when the title of "patriarch" was created in 531 by Justinian.[37] The Oxford Dictionary of the Christian
Church, s.v. patriarch (ecclesiastical), also calls it "a title dating from the 6th century, for the bishops
of the five great sees of Christendom". Merriam-Webster's Encyclopedia of World Religions,[38] says:
"Five patriarchates, collectively called the pentarchy, were the first to be recognized by the legislation
of the emperor Justinian (reigned 527–565)".
The status of Constantinople[edit]
In a canon of disputed validity,[39] the Council of Chalcedon also elevated the See of Constantinople to
a position "second in eminence and power to the Bishop of Rome".[28][29]
The Council of Nicaea in 325 had noted that the Sees of Alexandria, Antioch, and Rome should have
primacy over other, lesser dioceses. At the time, the See of Constantinople was not yet of ecclesiastical
prominence, but its proximity to the Imperial court gave rise to its importance. The Council of
Constantinople in 381 modified the situation somewhat by placing Constantinople second in honor,
above Alexandria and Antioch, stating in Canon III, that "the bishop of Constantinople... shall have the
prerogative of honor after the bishop of Rome; because Constantinople is New Rome". In the early 5th
century, this status was challenged by the bishops of Alexandria, but the Council of Chalcedon
confirmed in Canon XXVIII:
For the Fathers rightly granted privileges to the throne of old Rome, because it was the royal city. And
the One Hundred and Fifty most religious Bishops, actuated by the same consideration, gave equal
privileges (ἴσα πρεσβεῖα) to the most holy throne of New Rome, justly judging that the city which is
honoured with the Sovereignty and the Senate and enjoys equal privileges with the old imperial Rome,
should in ecclesiastical matters also be magnified as she is, and rank next after her. [9]
In making their case, the council fathers argued that tradition had accorded "honor" to the see of older
Rome because it was the first imperial city. Accordingly, "moved by the same purposes" the fathers
"apportioned equal prerogatives to the most holy see of new Rome" because "the city which is honored
by the imperial power and senate and enjoying privileges equaling older imperial Rome should also be
elevated to her level in ecclesiastical affairs and take second place after her". [40] The framework for
allocating ecclesiastical authority advocated by the council fathers mirrored the allocation of imperial
authority in the later period of the Roman Empire. The Eastern position could be characterized as being
political in nature, as opposed to a doctrinal view. In practice, all Christians East and West addressed
the papacy as the See of Peter and Paul or the Apostolic See rather than the See of the Imperial Capital.
Rome understands this to indicate that its precedence has always come from its direct lineage from the
apostles Peter and Paul rather than its association with Imperial authority.[clarification needed]
After the passage of the Canon 28, Rome filed a protest against the reduction of honor given to Antioch
and Alexandria. However, fearing that withholding Rome's approval would be interpreted as a rejection
of the entire council, in 453 the pope confirmed the council's canons with a protest against the 28th.

Consequences: Chalcedonian Schism[edit]

The near-immediate result of the council was a major schism.[clarification needed] The bishops that were
uneasy with the language of Pope Leo's Tome repudiated the council, saying that the acceptance of
two physes was tantamount to Nestorianism. Dioscorus of Alexandria advocated miaphysitism and had
dominated the Council of Ephesus.[41] Churches that rejected Chalcedon in favor of Ephesus broke off
from the rest of the Eastern Church in a schism, the most significant among these being the Church
of Alexandria, today known as the Coptic Orthodox Church of Alexandria.[42] The rise of the "so-
called" Monophysitism in the East (as branded by the West) was led by the Copts of Egypt. This must
be regarded as the outward expression of the growing nationalist trends in that province against the
gradual intensification of Byzantine imperialism, soon to reach its consummation during the reign of
Emperor Justinian. A significant effect on the Orthodox Christians in Egypt, was a series of
 18

persecutions by the Roman (later, Byzantine) empire forcing followers of the Eastern Orthodox Church
to claim allegiance to Leo's Tome, or Chalcedon. This led to the martyrdom, persecution and death of
thousands of Egyptian saints and bishops till the Arab Conquest of Egypt.[43] As a result, The Council
of Chalcedon is referred to as "Chalcedon, the Omnious" among Coptic Egyptians given how it led to
Christians persecuting other Christians for the first time[citation needed] in history. Coptic Orthodox
Christians continue to distinguish themselves from followers of Chalcedon to this day. Although the
theological differences are seen as limited (if non-existent), it is politics, the subsequent persecutions
and the power struggles of a rising Roman Empire, that may have led to the Great Schism, or at least
contributed significantly to amplifying it through the centuries.
Justinian I attempted to bring those monks who still rejected the decision of the Council of Chalcedon
into communion with the greater church. The exact time of this event is unknown, but it is believed to
have been between 535 and 548. St Abraham of Farshut was summoned to Constantinople and he
chose to bring with him four monks. Upon arrival, Justinian summoned them and informed them that
they would either accept the decision of the council or lose their positions. Abraham refused to
entertain the idea. Theodora tried to persuade Justinian to change his mind, seemingly to no avail.
Abraham himself stated in a letter to his monks that he preferred to remain in exile rather than
subscribe to a faith contrary to that of Athanasius.[clarification needed] They were not alone, and the non-
Chalcedon churches compose Oriental Orthodoxy, with the Church of Alexandria as their primus inter
pares. Only in recent years has a degree of rapprochement between Chalcedonian Christians and
the Oriental Orthodox been seen.

Oriental Orthodox view[edit]

Several Oriental Orthodox Church historians[who?] have viewed the Council as a dispute with the Church
of Rome over precedence among the various patriarchal sees. Coptic sources [44] both in Coptic and in
Arabic, suggest that questions of political and ecclesiastical authority exaggerated differences between
the two professions of faith.
The Copts consistently repudiate the Western identification of Alexandrine Christianity with
the Eutychianism which originated in Constantinople and which they have always regarded as a
flagrant heresy (monophysitism) since it declared the complete absorption of Christ's manhood in his
single divine nature whereas the Copts clearly upheld the doctrine of the two natures, divine and human
- mystically united in one (miaphysitism) without confusion, corruption, or change. As a strictly
traditional church, its religious leaders have sought biblical justification for this interpretation of the
Nicean Creed and the Cyriliian formula, but meanwhile have restricted the substance of their variance
to interpretation.

Liturgical commemorations[edit]
The Eastern Orthodox Church commemorates the "Holy Fathers of the 4th Ecumenical Council, who
assembled in Chalcedon" on the Sunday on or after July 13; [45] [46] however, in some places
(e.g. Russia) on that date is rather a feast of the Fathers of the First Six Ecumenical Councils.[47]
For both of the above complete propers have been composed and are found in the Menaion.
For the former "The Office of the 630 Holy and God-bearing Fathers of the 4th ... Summoned against
the Monophysites Eftyches and Dioskoros ..." was composed in the middle of the 14th century
by Patriarch Philotheus I of Constantinople. This contains numerous hymns exposing the council's
teaching, commemorating its leaders whom it praises and whose prayers it implores, and naming its
opponents pejoratively. e.g., "Come let us clearly reject the errors of ... but praise in divine songs the
fourth council of pious fathers."[46]
For the latter the propers are titled "We Commemorate Six Holy Ecumenical Councils".[47] This
repeatedly damns those anathematized by the councils with such rhetoric as "Christ-smashing
deception enslaved Nestorius" and "mindless Arius and ... is tormented in the fires of Gehenna ..."
while the fathers of the councils are praised and the dogmas of the councils are expounded in the
hymns therein.

“All Christian life, all holiness, is being by grace what Jesus is by nature: the Son of
God”. Marmion C. Christ in His Mysteries,
 19

This is the implication for spirituality – to be by grace what Christ is by nature.

Comment:
1 When we speak of Christ we speak of one who is truly God and truly man,
two natures in one person. His human nature is the instrument of His divine
nature in saving us. He took on a human body and soul so that He could suffer
and die for us on the cross.

2 Christ is the Son of the Father by nature. We become so by adoption when

we receive His grace.

3 The early heresies denied that Christ was one person in two natures in
various ways to which the church responded in her councils.
Mention a few of them.

4 Christ, by His paschal mystery, is the meritorius and efficient cause of our
salvation and sanctification.

Lesson for Spirituality

If Christians truly live by the life of grace they will be seen to be children of the
Father, other Christs. With Christ they can then truly say “Our Father” even though
Christ was Son by nature and they are so by grace.

Christ: the Way, the Truth and the Life

I am the way, the Truth and the Life. No one comes to the Father but by me.

“He is the way in His human nature to the truth and the life in His divine nature.” St
Thomas.

He is the truth because it is through Him that all things were made and they are
truthful to the degree that they conform to the ideas of them in the Word.

He is the life because He is the fullness of being and it is by His life that we live when
we live by grace. Grace is a sharing, a participation, by us in the divine life.
Comment:

1 The way: in Christian spirituality, people, no matter to what heights of

mysticism some may rise, cannot bypass the humanity of Christ.

2 The truth: truth is the adequation of the mind with reality, with things as the
exist in creation. But those things are “true” to begin with in as much as they
adequate with their original ideas in the Logos. Christ is truth also in the sense
that He lived out His own teaching perfectly.

3 The life: life for the Christian is not just the biological life (bios) he shares
with the animals but the higher life (zóē) he has from God by grace. Christ
is the fount, the well, of that grace as God and as head of the church.

Lesson for Spirituality

 20

1 The way: In practice this means that meditating on the passion of Christ and gazing
on the crucifix will always be central devotions of Christian spirituality.

2 The truth: a love of truth and therefore a hatred of falsehood and hypocrisy are
hallmarks of the true Christian.

3 The life: While our biological life is good because natural and God-given its desires
often go to access because of the weakness we have inherited due to original sin.
Accordingly we need to curb it, to deny it somewhat so that the supernatural life of
grace can shine forth in our lives. This will be seen perfectly in the glorified lives of
those who rise in God’s favour on judgement day and live in His kingdom but
glimpses of it can be seen at times in this life in the lives of some of the saints.

Christ: Priest, Prophet and King.

– Priest

You are a priest forever according to the order of Melchisedek”. Ps 109(110):4.

“Therefore, since we have a great high priest who has gone through the heavens,
Jesus the Son of God, let us hold firmly to the faith we profess”. Heb 4:14.

“Without father, mother, or ancestry, without beginning of days or end of life, thus
made to resemble the Son of God, he remains a priest forever. Heb 7:2-3. (cf S. Th. III,
q22,a6).

“Christ, as God, is in all things equal to the Father. But even in the human nature He
is above all men. Therefore, as man, He can be Mediator, but not as God”. St.
Thomas, S.Th III, 26, 2 ad 2

“The shadow of Calvary projects itself continuously over His thoughts. He lived in
advance all the variety of incidents of the great drama ... 'He shall be delivered to the
gentiles and shall be mocked and spat upon.'..”.Lk 18:32. Marmion C. Christ the Ideal
of the Priest, p24.

“Though they differ from one another in essence and not only in degree, the common
priesthood of the faithful and the ministerial or hierarchical priesthood are nonetheless
interrelated. Each of them in its own special way is a participation in the one
priesthood of Christ. The ministerial priest, by the sacred powers he enjoys, moulds
and rules the priestly people. Acting in the person of Christ, he brings about
the eucharistic sacrifice and offers it to God in the name of all the people. For their
part, the faithful join in the offering of the Eucharist by virtue of their royal
priesthood. They likewise exercise that priesthood by receiving the sacraments, by
prayer and thanksgiving, by the witness of a holy life, and by self denial and active
charity.” LG #10.

“The laity derive the right and duty to the apostolate from their union with Christ the
head; incorporated into Christ's Mystical Body through Baptism and strengthened by
the power of the Holy Spirit through Confirmation, they are assigned to the apostolate
by the Lord Himself. They are consecrated for the royal priesthood and the holy
 21

people (cf. 1 Peter 2:4-10) not only that they may offer spiritual sacrifices in
everything they do but also that they may witness to Christ throughout the world”.
Aposolicam Actuisitatem #3; cf also Christifideles Laici JPII.
Comment:

1 Amongst all ancient peoples the priest was a cultic figure offering sacrifice
to God (or to the gods) on behalf of his family or people to show his
submission to God, or to placate his anger or win his favour for his crops, or
victory in battle or various other needs.

2 Christ was a priest from the first moment of his earthly existence, but He did
not refer to himself explicitly as a priest while on earth. However, in time, the
writer of Hebrews came to see Him in such terms, referring back to Psalm 109
quoted above.

3 It was in His human nature, not in His divine nature, that Christ was a priest
but what He suffered in His human nature had infinite value because it was the
instrument of His divine nature.

Lesson for Spirituality:

Not just the priest but religious and laity have the obligation to be priestly, to share in
the priestly role of Christ by reason of their baptism and more so by reason of their
confirmation. They do this by receiving the sacraments, “by prayer and
thanksgiving, by the witness of a holy life, and by self denial and active charity.”
They do so at Sunday mass when they bring forward the gifts of bread and wine
– symbols of their achievements and their sufferings during the past week – and give
them to the priest soon to be changed into the body and blood of Christ at the
consecration and offered with His sacrifice to the Father.

– Prophet

"Thy God will raise up to thee a prophet of thy nation and of thy brethren." (Dt.
18:15).
"A prophet is not without honour, save in his own country." (Mat. 13:57; Jn. 4:44).

“You have heard it said from of old......but I say to you...”(Mt 5:21).

“They exercise a genuine apostolate by their activity on behalf of bringing the gospel
and holiness to men, and on behalf of penetrating and perfecting the temporal sphere
of things through the spirit of the gospel. In this way their temporal activity can
openly bear witness to Christ and promote the salvation of men. Since it is proper to
the layman’s state in life for him to spend his days in the midst of the world and of
secular transactions, he is called by God to burn with the spirit of Christ and to
exercise his apostolate in the world as a kind of leaven”., Aposolicam Actuisitatem,
Document on the Laity,#2 Vat II, cf also LG ch 4.
Comment:

1 The prophet is one who literally speaks before others, on behalf of God and
delivers a divine revelation to them. He can also be called the conscience of
the people.
 22

2 Christ referred to himself as a prophet when he was rejected in his home

town. (Mt 13:57).

3 He was a prophet indeed but He spoke with a new authority, an authority

that put Him in a relationship of equality with God, especially evident when
He forgave sins.

Lesson for Spirituality:

Not just the priest but religious and laity also have the obligation to be prophet, to
share in the prophet role of Christ by reason of their baptism and more so by reason of
their confirmation. They do so by bearing witness by their words to the gospel in a
secularist world where Christ and His teaching is so often set aside.

Religious can be prophetic in their running of schools in a catholic way where

the faith is at the centre of the curriculum, or in hospitals when they see to it that
only morally good practices are allowed.

– King/Shepherd

“Above his head they placed the written charge against him: This is Jesus, the king of
the Jews.” Mt 27:37.
“I am the good shepherd. The good shepherd lays down his life for his sheep”. Jn
10:11.

“Being a shepherd is clearly part of Christ’s work, for just as a shepherd takes care of
and feeds his flock, so Christ nourishes the spiritual life of the faithful by His body
and blood.” St Thomas, Commentary on Gospel of Jn ch. 10, lect. 3.

Comment:

1 Christ admitted to being a king when brought before Pilate (Mk 15:2). Yet he
had rejected the attempt the people made when they wanted to make Him king
by force upon seeing His miraculous powers. He was a king indeed but, not of
this world. The shepherd of Ezekiel and Jeremiah becomes the Good
Shepherd in John, the leader who knows his sheep, washes their feet and is
willing to lay down his life for them (Jn 10).

2 Authority in the church is vested in the ordained, coming down to them from
Christ through the apostles and their successors by valid ordination. But the
laity have a kingly role by helping their priests in church organization and
more so and more properly by “penetrating and perfecting the temporal sphere
of things through the spirit of the gospel”.

Lessons for Spirituality:

“They exercise a genuine apostolate by their activity on behalf of bringing the gospel
and holiness to men, and on behalf of penetrating and perfecting the temporal
sphere of things through the spirit of the gospel. In this way their temporal activity
can openly bear witness to Christ and promote the salvation of men. Since it is proper
 23

to the layman’s state in life for him to spend his days in the midst of the world and of
secular transactions, he is called by God to burn with the spirit of Christ and to
exercise his apostolate in the world as a kind of leaven”., Aposolicam Actuisitatem,
Document on the Laity,#2 Vat II, cf also LG ch 4.

Religious who might not be directly in the secular world of work can still exercise
this kingship by training young people in catholic social teaching and by teaching
to be morally good and upright as citizens.
Reading:
CCC Part One, Section Two, Ch Two, art 2ff.

Mary

Hail full of grace….Lk

Do whatever He tells you…..Jn. Her last recorded words.

Mother behold they Son…Jn. St John represents all of us here.

A woman clothed with the sun, the moon under her feet…Rev

431. Council of Ephesus: Theotokos – Mary is the mother of God.

This doctrine has to be understood in the context of Christ. She was the mother
of a divine person who had a human nature. She was not the mother of His
divine nature.

1854. Pius IX: Mary is the immaculate conception. (Lourdes 1858).

Story of the PP asking Bernadette the meaning of the words.

1950. Pius XII: Mary is assumed body and soul into heaven.

When the course of her earthly life was ended.

Vatican II: “In the words of the apostle there is but one mediator: "for there is but one
God and one mediator of God and men, the man Christ Jesus, who gave himself a
redemption for all" (1 Tim. 2:5-6). But Mary's function as mother of men in no way
obscures or diminishes this unique mediation of Christ, but rather shows its power.
But the Blessed Virgin's salutary influence on men originates not in any inner
necessity but in the disposition of God. It flows forth from the superabundance of the
merits of Christ, rests on his mediation, depends entirely on it and draws all its power
from it. It does not hinder in any way the immediate union of the faithful with
Christ but on the contrary fosters it”. Lument Gentium #60

This stress on Christ as the one mediator on the one hand and on Mary role of
mediatrix as not taking from the mediatorship of Christ is a reaction to
Protestantism. So also the role of the priest. Use the example of the surgeon and
the nurse. On the contrary, God, in Christ, wants to share His work of
mediation., as God does with all secondary causes. He does not begrudge them.
 24

61.”The predestination of the Blessed Virgin as Mother of God was associated with
the incarnation of the divine word: in the designs of divine Providence she was the
gracious mother of the divine Redeemer here on earth, and above all others and in a
singular way the generous associate and humble handmaid of the Lord. She
conceived, brought forth, and nourished Christ, she presented him to the Father in the
temple, shared her Son's sufferings as he died on the cross. Thus, in a wholly singular
way she cooperated by her obedience, faith, hope and burning charity in the work of
the Saviour in restoring supernatural life to souls. For this reason she is a mother to us
in the order of grace”.

Her close co-operation with Her Son on earth makes her a mother to us now in
heaven in the order of grace. Because He was a priest, she too can be said to have
fulfilled a priestly role by assisting Him. But He still did not make her one of the
ordained. So the argument for women priests should aim to have women live out
their priestly role of the laity but not to try to become one of the ordained.

62. “This motherhood of Mary in the order of grace continues uninterruptedly from
the consent which she loyally gave at the Annunciation and which she sustained
without wavering beneath the cross, until the eternal fulfilment of all the elect. Taken
up to heaven she did not lay aside this saving office but by her manifold intercession
continues to bring us the gifts of eternal salvation.[15] By her maternal charity, she
cares for the brethren of her Son, who still journey on earth surrounded by dangers
and difficulties, until they are led into their blessed home. Therefore the Blessed
Virgin is invoked in the Church under the titles of Advocate, Helper, Benefactress,
and Mediatrix.[16] This, however, is so understood that it neither takes away anything
from nor adds anything to the dignity and efficacy of Christ the one Mediator”.[17]

Again, her role of mediatrix continues in heaven for all of us. She implores
graces for us and has a role in distributing them to us. Her many apparitions in
so many places to so many people is proof of that.
No creature could ever be counted along with the Incarnate Word and Redeemer; but
just as the priesthood of Christ is shared in various ways both by his ministers and the
faithful, and as the one goodness of God is radiated in different ways among his
creatures, so also the unique mediation of the Redeemer does not exclude but
rather gives rise to a manifold cooperation which is but a sharing in this one
source.

The Church does not hesitate to profess this subordinate role of Mary, which it
constantly experiences and recommends to the heartfelt attention of the faithful, so
that encouraged by this maternal help they may the more closely adhere to the
Mediator and Redeemer”.

Here it is made perfectly clear that being close to Mary by no means draws us
away from Christ, that is, if it is proper devotion of petition and veneration and
not adoration. On the contrary, if we draw close to Mary she will bring us close
to Christ and Christ has given her to us as our mother for this purpose. Cardinal
Newman learned this and showed that the countries that lost Mary lost Christ
also – the reformation countries of Northern Europe – whereas the countries that
kept Mary kept Christ also, Southern Europe, until secularism. JPII learned the
same thing from St Louis de Monfort.
 25

63.”By reason of the gift and role of her divine motherhood, by which she is united
with her Son, the Redeemer, and with her unique graces and functions, the Blessed
Virgin is also intimately united to the Church. As St. Ambrose taught, the Mother of
God is a type of the Church in the order of faith, charity, and perfect union with
Christ.[18] For in the mystery of the Church, which is itself rightly called mother and
virgin, the Blessed Virgin stands out in eminent and singular fashion as exemplar both
of virgin and mother.[19] Through her faith and obedience she gave birth on earth to
the very Son of the Father, not through the knowledge of man but by the
overshadowing of the Holy Spirit, in the manner of a new Eve who placed her faith,
not in the serpent of old but in God's messenger without wavering in doubt. The Son
whom she brought forth is he whom God placed as the first born among many
brethren (Rom. 8:29), that is, the faithful, in whose generation and formation she
cooperates with a mother's love”.

Because Mary is the virgin mother of Christ, the head of the church, she is also
mother and model of the church. The importance of her obedience which is
compared to the disobedience of Eve.

Comment:

1 From the gospels we can see the close co-operation of Mary in the
redeeming work of her Son. That role continues still in heaven where she
constantly intercedes for us for the graces we need here on earth.

2 She is in heaven with her glorified body. So she is our model at the
beginning and end of our spiritual journey.

3. Mary intercedes for us and has a role in the dispensing of the graces of her
Son. Hence we speak of her as mediatrix. But this does not add to or take from
the role of Christ as the one mediator between God and men. Mary is
subordinate to Him in the work of our salvation.

Lessons for Spirituality:

Lessons for Spirituality:

1 “ But while in the most Blessed Virgin the Church has already reached that
perfection whereby she exists without spot or wrinkle (cf. Eph. 5:27), the faithful still
strive to conquer sin and increase in holiness. And so they turn their eyes to Mary
who shines forth to the whole community of the elect as the model of virtues.
Devoutly meditating on her and contemplating her in the light of the Word made man,
the Church reverently penetrates more deeply into the great mystery of the Incarnation
and becomes more and more like her spouse”. Lumen Gentium #65

The first and most obvious lesson is the importance of turning to Mary in prayer.
How foolish not to. She is now in perfect glory in the highest place in heaven
because she was most perfect in grace here on earth. But we are still on the way
and still struggling with sin and with the effects of original sin which incline us to
sin. We cannot win that struggle on our own, with our own will power, unless we
 26

have the help of grace; and who better to turn to than she who is full of grace so
that she will ask her Son, the source of all grace, for the grace we need. Prayer to
the Mother of perpetual succor.

2 Traditionally the rosary has been a special prayer to Mary given to us by Mary
herself. In it we ask her many times to intercede for us in the present moment and at
the hour of our death.

Story of St Dominic. The first half is from scripture and the second half is from
the church and it has her plead for us at two crucial moments: now and at the
hour of our death. The repetition is a proof of fidelity.
Catholic spirituality does not take place in a vacuum but in the context of the church which has
Mary as model. So let us look briefly at the church.

Mary is mother of the church, the body of Christ. Or she can be compared to the neck through
which the graces of the head flow to the church. So let us look briefly at the church, because,
as I said before, spirituality does not happen in a vacuum but in the context of the church.

The Church

I am the vine you are the branches…..

Christ is the head of His body the church…..

“ The Church indeed contemplating her hidden sanctity, imitating her charity and
faithfully fulfilling the Father's will, by receiving the word of God in faith becomes
herself a mother. By preaching and baptism she brings forth sons, who are conceived
of the Holy Spirit and born of God, to a new and immortal life. She herself is a virgin,
who keeps in its entirety and purity the faith she pledged to her spouse. Imitating the
mother of her Lord, and by the power of the Holy Spirit, she keeps intact faith, firm
hope and sincere charity”.[20] Lumen Gentium #64.

Here the church is presented to us as a virgin and mother modelled on Our

Lady, virgin and mother and as mother bringing forth children from the
baptismal font.

“This holy Council first of all turns its attention to the Catholic faithful. Basing itself
on scripture and tradition, it teaches that the Church, a pilgrim now on earth, is
necessary for salvation: the one Christ is mediator and the way of salvation; he is
present to us in his body which is the Church. He himself explicitly asserted the
necessity of faith and baptism (cf. Mk. 16:16; Jn. 3:5), and thereby affirmed at the
same time the necessity of the Church which men enter through baptism as through a
door. Hence they could not be saved who, knowing that the Catholic Church was
founded as necessary by God through Christ, would refuse either to enter it, or to
remain in it”. LG #14

Going on now to talk about the church herself the council presents the church as
a pilgrim people on the march towards the kingdom of the God. In times past,
prior to the council, she would have been presented as a solid pyramid from the
 27

pope down to the people. This new picture of the church as a pilgrim people does
not change the fact that the church is, indeed, a hierarchy with the pope at the
top and having supreme authority. But she is also a people on the march with
the pope leading his flock.

Then the quote talks about the necessity of the church for salvation. First of all
one cannot separate Christ from the church or the church from Christ as some
do. Nor therefore can you have a spirituality which ignores the church even if
one is all for Christ. The church is necessary for salvation itself and not just for
spirituality. Hence we need to clarify the statement from earlier councils that
“outside the church there is no salvation”. There was a swing in the opposite
direction after the council saying that anyone and everyone can be saved in any
religion or none and that the church was not necessary anymore. This was
undermining missionary activity and fervour. But the quote about clarifies what
is meant.

“Those who, through no fault of their own, do not know the Gospel of Christ or his
Church, but who nevertheless seek God with a sincere heart, and, moved by grace, try
in their actions to do his will as they know it through the dictates of their conscience--
those too many achieve eternal salvation.[19] Nor shall divine providence deny the
assistance necessary for salvation to those who, without any fault of theirs, have not
yet arrived at an explicit knowledge of God, and who, not without grace, strive to lead
a good life”. LG #16.

This refers to people of good will who genuinely do not know the church but are
sincerely trying to find God as best they can. They too can be saved but if they
are saved it is still through the grace of Christ, which flows from His church, the
one true church, even if they do not know that. They are not saved by their own
efforts or by any other religion or name.
“To accomplish so great a work Christ is always present in his Church, especially in
her liturgical celebrations. He is present in the sacrifice of the Mass not only in the
person of his minister, "the same now offering, through the ministry of priests, who
formerly offered himself on the cross, "[20] but especially in the eucharistic species.
by his power he is present in the sacraments so that when anybody baptizes it is really
Christ himself who baptizes.[21] He is present in his word since it is he himself who
speaks when the holy scriptures are read in the Church. Lastly, he is present when the
Church prays and sings, for he has promised "where two or three are gathered
together in my name there am I in the midst of them" (Mt. 18:20). Sacrosanctum
Consilium #7.

The church is the normal context of the spiritual life and this is true even of the
hermit alone in the desert. He is still very much in the church.

Comment:

1 The church is the normal context of the spiritual life because she is the
sacrament of Christ who, to begin with, is the Word of the Father made flesh
so that we could have His life and have it more abundantly. Also the spiritual
life of the individual is a social thing as well because in being children of the
Father we are brothers and sisters of each other. To see clearly that the church
 28

is the means to salvation and wilfully to refuse to enter it or to leave it is to

lose salvation.

2 In the liturgy Christ is the high priest acting though the sacraments which
He Himself instituted so as to give us His grace.

3 Those who are formally outside the church, through no fault of their own,
can also be saved because the grace of Christ can reach them in ways known
only to God.

Conclusions:

1. The vision of the Trinity is our goal in the next life and we live its koinonia in this
life by the help of grace. Christ, God and man, priest, prophet and king, is
absolutely central to reaching that vision and to having that grace. Vatican II
teaches that people in non Christian religions and even those with no religion can
be saved if they seek God and follow their conscience as best they know how. But
even so, such people are saved only by the grace of Christ, even if they do not
know Him explicitly.

2. Accordingly Christian spirituality is not just a matter of having a set of Christian

beliefs; it is a living out of the mysteries of the faith, a following of Christ, being
led by the Holy Spirit, so that one comes home to the Father at life’s end.

3. The grace of Christ normally flows to people in or through the church that He
founded because it is His mystical body, even if, again, some people do not know
this. Formal membership of the church by baptism is then the proper and normal
way to this grace. Those who are not members due to no fault of their own may
still have this grace because God is not limited to the sacraments.

4. Our Lady, being the mother of God, is the mediatrix of the graces of Christ her
Son. This does not add to or take from the unique mediation of Christ.

Reading:
Jordan Aumann, Spiritual Theology, Ch 3. LG and the other texts referred to above

Because grace is essential to the spiritual life and because grace builds on nature we
will look next at the nature of man, the natural organism, and then at the spiritual
organism, man influenced by grace.