SPIRITUALITY, CHRISTIAN Terminology The word spirituality derives from the Latin spiritualitas, an abstract word related to spiritus and spiritualis, which were used to translate Paul's pneuma and pneumatikos. In Pauline theology “spirit” (pneuma) is opposed to “flesh” (Greek sarx, Latin caro), and “spiritual” (pneu- matikos) is set over against either “fleshly” (Greek sarkikos; Latin carnalis—Gal 3:3; 5:13, 16-25; 1 Cor 3:1-3; Rom 7:14-8:14) or “animal” (Greek psychikos; Latin animalis—1 Cor 2:14-15), but, signifi- cantly for later developments, they are contrasted neither with “body” (Greek soma; Latin corpus) or “bodily” (Greek somatikos; Latin corporalis) nor with “mat- ter” (Greek hyle; Latin materia). For Paul, the “pneumatic” or “spiritual” person is one whose whole being and life are or- dered, led, or influenced by the “Spirit of God” (Greek Pneuma Theou; Latin Spiritus Dei—see 1 Cor 2:12, 14), whereas the person who is “sarkic,” that is, “carnal” or “fleshly,” or who is “psychic” or “ani- mal,” is one whose whole being and life are opposed to God’s Spirit. The opposition, for Paul, is not between the incorporeal and the corporeal or between the immate- rial and material, but between two ways of life. Thus one’s body and one’s psychic soul (Greek psyche; Latin anima) can, like one’s spirit, be spiritual if led by the Spirit, and one’s spirit, mind, or will can be carnal if opposed to the Spirit. Spiritualitas, as first evidenced in the 5th century (Pseudo-Jerome, Epist. 7; PL 30:114D-115A: “So act as to advance in spirituality”), referred to the Pauline sense of life according to the Spirit of God. This use was continued in subsequent centuries, but in the 12th century spiritualitas began to be opposed to corporalitas or mate- rialitas. This changed the Pauline religious Meaning so as to now express something of the entitative order; the new meaning pre- pared for a later widespread view that con- SPIRITUALITY, CHRISTIAN 931 fused spirituality with disdain for the body and matter. Together with this philoso- phical meaning, the earlier Pauline view continued in authors such as Thomas Aquinas. Still further meanings appeared later: persons exercising ecclesiastical ju- risdiction were called the spiritualitas, or “lords spiritual,” as opposed to those exer- cising civil jurisdiction, the temporalitas, or “lords temporal”; next, ecclesiastical property came to be called spiritualitas, and the property of the civil ruler temporalitas. Only in the 17th century did the philo- sophical senses of spiritualitas appear in the French and English cognates. At that time spiritualité was used in French for the devout life, but it was sometimes applied pejoratively by authors speaking of la spiritualité of Fénélon, Madame Guyon, and Marie de Il’Incarnation, suspected of Quietism or fanaticism. After being used relatively rarely in the following centuries, spiritualité became widely used through its appearing in titles of two influential works, Auguste Saudreau’s Manuel de spiritualité (1917) and Pierre Pourrat’s four-volume Laspiritualite catholique (1918-1928). En- glish usage, from the 1920s on, saw more frequent examples of “spirituality” as a re- sult of translation of Pourrat’s work and that of other French authors. Since the 1950s the term has become very popular, frequently replacing terms such as “devo- tion,” “piety,” “interior life,” “life of the soul,” “spiritual life,” “spiritual theology.” Although originating within a Catholic context, the term has more recently been adopted by many Protestants, by scholars of other religions, and even by secularists and Marxists. Assuredly, Christian spiritu- ality must have at least a Christian ecu- menical dimension, but this is insufficient. The increased meeting of Christians with diverse religious traditions means that Christian spirituality, whether experiential or the object of study, must not be isolated from these other traditions and must take account of their diverse “spiritualities,”932 SPIRITUALITY, CHRISTIAN whether they be those of the “great” world religions or of native peoples whose rich spiritualities are being increasingly recog- nized (¢.g., their awareness of divine pres- ence, their rituals, their concern for all creation). Three Levels of Spirituality The Real or Existential Level of Lived Experience Several different but related levels of spirituality can be distinguished. The first and most basic level is that of a person’s lived experience, that is, the real or existen- tial level. For Christian spirituality, the re- newal of biblical theology and greater awareness of pneumatology in the West have led to an increasing link of this lived spirituality with the Pauline notion, that is, Christian life as guided or influenced by the Holy Spirit, who is given by the Father and the risen Christ in order to make per- sons sisters and brothers of Christ and chil- dren of the Father, as well as to fashion both women and men into images of Christ (Rom 8:29, 16-17). All this happens by the Spirit’s leading them to advance in Christ to the “praise of the glory of [God’s] grace” (Eph 1:6). The Holy Spirit gives individu- als and the community the gifts of faith, hope, charity (1 Cor 13:13), wisdom, un- derstanding (Col 1:9), and liberty (Rom 8:21; Gal 5:13; 2 Cor 3:17), fruits such as love, joy, peace, patience (Gal 5:23-24), and charisms of different kinds that build up the Christian community (1 Cor 12:4- ~ 11, 28-30; Rom 12:6-8; Eph 4:11-13). These gifts of the Spirit and the person’s mystical union with Christ mean that Christian life in the Spirit takes place in an ecclesial context, in which celebration of word and sacrament culminates in the Eu- charist (here occur important variations in Catholic and Protestant spiritualities), At the same time this experiential level of Christian spirituality embraces the whole human person (body, soul, spirit), who is part ofa constantly changing material cre- ated order (physical, plant, animal), who is a symbolizing, ritualizing being, who learns and uses language for communica- tion and self-expression; a person who is both an individual and a member of soci- ety, who is inculturated in place and time and so is affected by his or her social and personal history; a person, finally, who is called to serve others in the social, politi- cal, and economic orders, Although Chris- tians may not always consciously thema- tize their lived spirituality in this way— indeed, too often in the past many of these elements have not been related to Chris- tian spirituality—their spirituality does in- volve all these elements. Thus their atti- tude toward them, whether positive or negative, or even if they are unaware of their spiritual import, affects their growth in tending toward God. Since by baptism every Christian is plunged into the lived experience of life in the Spirit, spirituality on the existential level must include this experience of all Christians. Nevertheless, “spirituality” is often used especially of those who, guided and empowered by the Holy Spirit, con- sciously seek to further their going out of and beyond themselves and their limita- tions by intensifying their life in the Spirit and in Christ for the Father; or, to use other language, “spirituality” is often referred to those who of set purpose perseveringly seek “union with God” or “perfection” or “divinization.” Spirituality of Groups and Varying Spiritual Traditions Although Christian spirituality as a lived experience must be personal, this experi- ence is neither received nor lived in isola- tion, Each person is introduced into a particular social and inculturated spiritu- ality, which presents Christian ideals and approaches to those ideals in a unique way. Hence second level of Christian spiritual- ity is that of a group, the family in the first instance and often the parish, but also for many the spirituality of a specializedgroup, e.g., Latin or Eastern Catholic spir- ituality; Anglican, Lutheran, Methodist, Baptist, Mennonite spirituality; the spirit- uality of different religious communities and increasingly of lay associates of reli- gious communities; the spirituality of lay faith-communities, of cursillo, charis- matic, or other movements. This second level often revolves around the formula- tion of teaching, or the development of symbols, rituals, artistic and other expres- sion, or guidance about the lived reality or experience and how this is to be intensi- fied. Sometimes the life, example, or teach- ing of an outstanding person (e.g., Francis of Assisi, Catherine of Siena, Julian of Norwich, Martin Luther, Teresa of Avila, John Wesley, Thérése of Lisieux, Dorothy Day, Dietrich Bonhoeffer, Thomas Mer- ton) becomes a pattern for others; some- times such influence comes from writings by persons judged to be gifted with insight into spiritual development. Historically, the dynamics of this second level has meant the rise of many varying traditions or schools of Christian spiritual- ity. The varieties of Christian spirituality have their origin in the Christian Scrip- tures themselves. In addition to the Pauline doctrines, the four Gospels repre- sent four different approaches to Jesus and his life and teaching: Mark’s emphasis on the coming of the kingdom of God, reach- ing its climax in Christ’s passion and death; Matthew’s ecclesial interests and his presentation of Christian life in the chal- lenging Sermon on the Mount; Luke’s at- tention to the compassion of God revealed in Jesus; John’s attention to Jesus as God’s Word calling for faith in himself and offer- ing life and the Spirit. Other texts bring out further aspects. For example, the doctrine of | Peter of the person’s sharing the divine nature or of all Christians as the People of God sharing Christ’s priesthood has been influential in past and present Christian spirituality; again, the Letter of James has provoked controversy about the relation SPIRITUALITY, CHRISTIAN 933 between faith and works, a question al- ready raised by Paul. Each spiritual tradition or school seeks to model itself on the gospel but empha- sizes different aspects of the gospel in teaching, practices, and forms of expres- sion. Thus the many strands of reflection on Jesus and his gospel in the Bible called forth different emphases and responses as the gospel was preached, received, and inculturated in various regions in the early Church. The most striking variations were those between the West and the East, e.g., Eastern stress on liturgy and the resurrec- tion of Christ, and Western stress on moral doctrine, original sin, and the passion of Christ. Further differences have grown within these larger traditions, e.g., Syrian versus Byzantine spirituality in the East, and Celtic or Germanic versus Latin spirit- uality in the West. Within these, still fur- ther variations took place within history. The most significant of these in the West was the split between Protestant and Cath- olic spiritualities, especially in relation to the doctrines of grace and works, different emphases on word and sacrament, and sharp divergences concerning ecclesiology. A recent clear example of such historical developments is the shift in Western spirit- uality in this century, the spirituality de- rived from the Second Vatican Council being a major although not exclusive component. The Study of Spirituality Past studies. Distinct from the first and second levels of spirituality is the study, practical or academic, of spirituality in programs or schools. In the Fathers, spirit- uality was generally interwoven with their theology, itself richly biblical, replete with symbolism and typology, often expressed in rhetorical fashion in their liturgical homilies. But, it has been noted, authors such as Clement of Alexandria, Tertullian, Origen, Ambrose, and Augustine wrote practical treatises to help promote the per- sonal life of Christians (Solignac, col.934 SPIRITUALITY, CHRISTIAN 1156). The theology of the great medieval commentators or summists such as Bona- venture or Aquinas was of one piece. The articulations of their works did not repre- sent distinct theological disciplines like the later divisions into dogmatic and moral theology. Their doctrine on life in the Spirit was interwoven with the whole fab- ric of their unified theology: the doctrines of God, the Trinity, creation, Christ, grace, sin, sacraments, etc., were as much a part of their spirituality as their discussions of virtues, prayer, etc. One of their main teaching offices was commentary on Scrip- ture, in which application to life in the Spirit was prominent. The later demarca- tion of moral theology from dogmatic the- ology, the excessive multiplication of sub- tle questions, and the emphasis on a morals of obligation and casuistry robbed theol- ogy of its spiritual dynamism. Reaction against this deadening of theology led to the growth of separate treatises of spiritual theology or of ascetic and mystical theol- ogy. These continued to flourish in theo- logical schools well into the 20th century. Recent changes. The development of spiritual theology or of ascetic and mysti- cal theology tended to focus narrowly on prayer, mortification, virtues and vices, tules of spiritual progress, and spiritual di- rection. The recovery of biblical, patristic, and liturgical theology; awareness of the all-embracing unity of theology for the great medieval masters; and recognition of the importance of Christian experience, personal and social, have broadened the theological context of studies in spiritual- ity. Joann Wolski Conn has noted five dis- tinctive trends in. recent spirituality stud- ies: “sustained attention to feminist issues, concern for the link between prayer and so- cial justice, reliance on classical sources for answers to current questions, recognition of the value of developmental psychology and its understanding of the ‘self,’ and agreement that experience is the most ap- propriate starting point” (Conn, p. 31). These currents in the study of spirituality are now often developed within new practi- cal and academic programs specializing in spirituality. At the same time, the greater opening of theology itself to Christian ex- perience, together with its greater yse of new philosophies, hermeneutics, linguis- tics, anthropology, aésthetics, psychology, sociology, political science, and econom- ics, has led theology to take a much broader approach to spirituality than was the case in earlier “spiritual theology.” The con- junction of these developments in spiritu- ality programs and in theology has raised the question of how the study of spiritual- ity stands in relation to theology and reli- gious studies as well as to the philosophical and other human sciences. Religious studies and Christian spiritual- ity. It should be noted that in academic cir- cles there are two distinct approaches to spirituality. One operates within a commu- nity of faith responding to a revelation accepted as normative, although its con- ceptualization and verbal expression are subject to constant scrutiny and develop- ment. The other is the approach of secular religious studies, which examines spiritu- ality without such a faith commitment. Such an approach, found in many secular universities, seeks to produce a description of different spiritualities, a presentation derived from the sources, widely con- ceived, that have been studied. These sources frequently include a faith-content and the response to it as an important and perhaps decisive element, but these are an- alyzed descriptively and are not judged in terms of a theology elaborated within a faith community. A further step is compar- ison of different spiritualities within the same religious tradition or as found in dif- ferent religious traditions. This in turn can lead a scholar using these methods toward. discovery of fundamental principles com- mon to all the spiritualities studied and to- ward finding reasons for variations in spiritualities. Such research has great value for Chris- tian spirituality, even for those who workwithin a context of Christian faith. The re- sults of this research can broaden the per- spectives of committed students of Chris- tian spirituality, can challenge assump- tions and conclusions accepted too easily, and can suggest avenues and methods of re- search that might occur less readily to Christian scholars. However, there is room for a hermeneutics of suspicion when scholars using the methods of secular reli- gious studies claim complete objectivity. It is necessary to examine the philosophical, psychological, sociological, linguistic, her- meneutic, and other methodologies being used by such scholars. These are some- times made explicit but sometimes are as- sumed with inadequate self-criticism, and one must examine their application in order to see if reductionism is at work. For example, in the history of spirituality, why is some evidence selected as more crucial or influential than other evidence? Such selectivity inevitably involves the scholar’s judgment of causalities by analogy with what the scholar considers decisive in the development of spirituality. The same is true with the application of other human sciences. Similar, questions must, of course, be asked of the Christian scholar using these sciences in studying spir- ituality. With respect to the first method, that used by scholars working within a Chris- tian faith-commitment, the relations be- tween the study of spirituality and theology are still subject to discussion, with no clear consensus existing at present. For some, the traditional notion endures, that is, that theology, sometimes conceived rather nar- rowly, should dominate the study of spirit- uality, providing principles that will guide practical applications to life in the Spirit. For others, theology itself must today use the resources not only of philosophy but of all the human sciences. Hence theology, when focused on Christian life in the Spirit, must take account of all these as- pects in a multidisciplinary dialogue; fur- ther, it must have as part of its data not only SPIRITUALITY, CHRISTIAN 935 the revealed word of God as developed in authentic tradition but also the range of human experience, historical and espe- cially contemporary. Spirituality as a specialized field of study. Many regret the past split between theol- ogy and spirituality, and, wishing to main- tain the fundamental unity of theological study, would want to unite spirituality, to- gether with biblical, historical, liturgical, pastoral, and canonical studies, within one theological view in which each of these would provide insights for an integrating vision. But just as the demands of speciali- zation have required that each of these areas of study develop its own method and programs, so it seems necessary for the aca- demic study of spirituality to organize it- self as a specialized field of study, Since the first two levels of spirituality, the very mat- ter of study, are personal or social in partic- ular rather than in universal ways, studies in spirituality concentrate on the particu- lar more than does theology, even when theology has become more attuned to ex- perience and to multidisciplinary dia- logue. In a distinction without separation of theology and spirituality, Christian ex- perience could be seen as a common “stock” (souche) for theology and spiritual- ity, with theology examining the various components of this experience and spiritu- ality investigating the way this experience becomes particular or personal according to different emphases in living the gospel (Lagué, pp. 350-351). Increased specialization in biblical, historical, and other areas has, however, brought the danger of isolation and lack of communication with theology and other discipjines. The same danger could threaten spirituality studied as a distinct discipline. Christian spirituality must, like theology, be multidisciplinary, incorporat- ing the outlook of anthropology, psychol- ogy, sociology, and other disciplines; it must also be ecumenical and in dialogue with non-Christian religions. But it must also remain in intimate contact with Chris-936 SPIRITUALITY, CHRISTIAN tian theology and the other Christian areas of study. Within these relationships a fundamen- tal question is that of the criteria used to judge particular or group experiences of life in the Spirit. For some, a theology that is itself in intimate relationship with the other appropriate disciplines would be that which exercises final judgment of authen- tic Christian spirituality, for others, the judgment would come within the interplay of theology and the human sciences in their examination of the particular religious ex- perience in question. One of the most serious analyses arguing for spirituality as a distinct discipline is that by Sandra Schneiders, who has elabo- rated the methods and criteria of judgment she sees operative in its academic study. For her, “spirituality is the field of study which attempts to investigate in an inter- disciplinary way the spiritual experience as such, i.¢., as spiritual and as experience” (Schneiders, p. 692). She describes four characteristics that, for her, distinguish the discipline of spirituality from related fields of study. First, it is interdisciplinary, so that spirituality must use whatever ap- proaches are relevant to the reality being studied; for Christian spirituality these in- clude at least biblical studies, history, the- ology, psychology, and comparative reli- gion. Second, it is “a descriptive-critical rather than prescriptive-normative disci- Pline,” that is, it “is not the ‘practical appli- cation’ of theoretical principles, theologi- cal or other, to concrete life experience. It is the critical study of such experience” (p. 693). Third, spirituality is “ecumenical, interreligious, and cross-cultural.” The context for study of spiritualexperience is “anthropologically inclusive,” since Chris- tianity is not presumed to exhaust or in- clude the whole of religious reality (p. 693). Fourth, “spirituality is a holistic disci- pline” because it does not limit itself to “explorations of the explicitly religious” but examines all the elements integral to spiritual experience, ¢.g., “the psychologi- cal, bodily, historical, social, political, aes- thetic, intellectual, and other dimensions of the human subject of spiritual experi- ence” (p. 693). It might be observed that Schneiders often seems to speak of theology in a rather narrow sense. Most contemporary theolo- gians would maintain that at least the first, third, and fourth characteristics must be true of theological method today if theol- ogy is to seek understanding of revelation and to inculturate it in today’s world. Thus it would appear that the difference between theology and spirituality might be found in the second characteristic and in the ways the study of spirituality is practiced, al- though even here mest contemporary theo- logians seek to begin from, and relate te, experience much more than did those using deductive methods (Lagué, pp. 347-349), Perhaps the specificity of spirituality is better clarified by the description Schneiders gives of its practice (pp.-693~ 695): spirituality examines the individual as opposed to the general; it involves par- ticipation by the student of spirituality as opposed to an objective self-distancing (here she acknowledges the complications involved in the relation of praxis and per- sonal self-involvement to the disciplinek its procedures are by way of description, critical analysis, and constructive appro- Ppriation, in which theology and the humaa. and social sciences play a part and in which hermeneutical theory governs the process. it seems to have an irreducibly triple final ity, that is, accumulation of knowledge. assistance of the students in their spiritual lives, and help for them to foster spiritual life in others. Schneiders’ valuable contribution to the discussion seems to be open to further questioning about how to identify the ulti mate criteria for critical judgment of Christian spiritualities as authentically human and Christian. Theology and the human and social sciences, it is said, are of particular importance to the analytical andcritical second phase of study “leading to an explanation and evaluation of the subject” (p. 695; see p. 692), whereas “the third phase is synthetic and/or con- structive, and leads to appropriation [in Ricoeur’s ‘sense of the transformational actualization of meaning’ (note 68)]. Hermeneutical theory governs this final phase” (p. 695). Again, “while making use ofa plurality of specific methods, the disci- pline has no one method of its own. Rather, methods function in the explanatory mo- ment of the hermeneutical dialectic be- tween explanation and understanding” (p. 694). It seems, then, that in this view, after the contributions of theology and the other sci- ences have been heard, the application of hermeneutical theory provides the ulti- mate criterion for judgment. While it is true that theology itself must apply herme- neutical science self-critically, it could be asked how a Christian spirituality can be judged as authentic on grounds other than those of a broadly conceived Christian the- ology. Would hermeneutical theory, as ex- pounded by the individual scholar, not become the final judge of authentic Chris- tian spirituality and the ways of its devel- opment? And although “a theologically critical moment is integral to the study of the experience under investigation” (p. 692, n. 62), the final judgment is left to other methods and theories. Could it not be asked whether this ultimacy of hermeneutical criteria in fact leads spiritu- ality thus conceived and practiced finally to approach the method of secular religious studies? Problem Areas in Spirituality The developing study of spirituality raises other questions and problems be- sides those already mentioned. The pre- ceding discussion of interrelated disci- plines evokes the serious problems raised by the pluralism of theologies, philoso- phies, anthropologies, hermeneutics, lin- guistic theories, etc. A multidisciplinary SPIRITUALITY, CHRISTIAN 937 approach necessary to studies of spiritual- ity will inevitably confront these plurali- ties, just as these theologies and the human. sciences themselves meet analogous prob- lems in their attempts to be multidis- ciplinary. The solution must lie in the recognition that there is no simple uni- formity in any of the dialogue partners; rather, there are groups within each disci- pline whose variety can be enriching and challenging for those who listen to them all, even if integration is thereby made more difficult. Second, there is the problem of training assistants or guides for those seeking to in- tensify their life in the Spirit. Although there are now a number of faculties of spir- ituality or departments within faculties of theology that have established solid stan- dards for study and research, some of the more practical, rather brief programs are in danger of giving false confidence in their competence to those completing them. Those giving spiritual assistance in Christian spirituality run the risk of mak- ing erroneous judgments if they lack a thorough training in all aspects of theology as well as in other related disciplines such as psychology and anthropology. Christian. spirituality must be guided by sound theol- ogy of the Trinitarian God, of creation, of the human person and. human destiny, of sin, of Christ and his saving work, of the in- terplay of grace and human effort, of the sacraments—in a word, ofall the mysteries of faith. Competence is also needed regard- ing principles of moral life and moral deci- sions together with knowledge of the theol- ogy of prayer, virtues, gifts of the Spirit, etc, Any Christian spirituality involves the- ological positions in these areas either ex- Plicitly or implicitly (Principe, p. 138). If these positions are not recognized or exam- ined critically, assistance can be inade- quate and possibly dangerous. Brief pro- grams in practical spirituality can hardly equip persons to become competent assis- tants to others in their spiritual journey.938 SPIRITUALITY, CHRISTIAN Third, spirituality as a discipline will have to examine more carefully whether it should take as its object only those who are consciously striving for a more intense life in the Spirit or whether it should examine manifestations of spirituality in all Chris- tians. Here in particular the relevance of popular religion or popular devotion must be considered. The study of popular reli- gion has become an important new field of religious studies, involving debates about its meaning and about methodology. This question is especially important if the dis- cipline of spirituality wishes to examine the spirituality of social or cultural groups in the present or past. Finally, the question of inculturation within catholicity, which has become in- creasingly important for theology and missiology, must likewise concern the study and indeed the lived experience of individual and group spiritualities. The past varieties of spiritualities are them- selves products of inculturation of the gos- pel and of Christian lived experience of the gospel in differing historical cultures. Such inculturation has produced a catholicity of spiritual experience that provides a rich variety within a fundamental Christian unity of faith. The spread of the gospel throughout the world and the awareness of the need for more inculturation and true catholicity mean that study of spirituality and pastoral service of spiritual develop- ment will have to be even broader in scope than is the case at present. This increased multiplication of distinctive spiritualities, each striving to live the gospel, together with a disciplined study of them, should lead to an ever-richer worldwide “praise of the glory of God’s grace.” ‘See also APOSTOLIC SPIRITUALITY; ASCETICAL THE- OLOGY; AUGUSTINIAN SPIRITUALITY; CELTIC SPIR- ITUALITY; CONTEMPORARY SPIRITUALITY; CUL- TURE; DEVOTION(S), POPULAR: DIVINIZATION; EARLY CHRISTIAN SPIRITUALITY; EASTERN CHRIS- TIAN SPIRITUALITY; ECOLOGICAL CONSCIOUSNESS; ECUMENISM, SPIRITUAL; HISTORY, HISTORICAL CON- SCIOUSNESS; HOLISTIC SPIRITUALITY; HOLY SPIRIT; INCARNATION; LAY SPIRITUALITY; MODERN SPIRIT: UALITY; MYSTICAL THEOLOGY; PATRISTIC SPIRITU- ALITY; PROTESTANT SPIRITUALITIES, QUIETISM REFORMATION AND CATHOLIC REFORMATION SPIR- ITUALITIES, WESTERN MEDIEVAL SPIRITUALITY. Bibliography: Dictionnaire de spiritualite: A. Solignac. “Spiritualite: Le mot et l'histoire,” vol. 14. fasc. 95-96 (1990), cols, 1142-1160. M. Dupuy, “Spiritualité La notion de spiritualité,” vol. 14, fasc. 96 (1990), cols 1160-1173. Nuovo dizionario di spiritualit, ed. S. De FioresandT. Goffi (Rome: Edizioni Paoline, 1982); French adapea- tion by F Vial (Paris: Cerf, 1983): G. Moiol. “Esperienza cristiana” pp. 536-541. S. De Fiores, “Spiritualita contentporanea,” pp. 1516-1543. G. Moioli, “Teologia spirituale,” pp. 1597-1609. H. U. von Balthasar, “Das Evangelium als Norm und Kritik aller Spiritualitat,” Spiritus Creator: Skizzen ne Theologie 3 (Einsiedein: Johannes Verlag, 1967) 247- 267. J. Wolski Conn, Spirituality and Personal Manw- ity (New York: Paulist, 1989). M. Lagué, “Spiritualiné et théologie: d'une méme souche: Note sur l’actualité d'un débat,” Eglise et Théologie 20/2 (1989) 333-35}. W. Principe, “Toward Defining Spirituality,” Studies in Religion/Sciences Religieuses 12 (1983) 127-141. S. Schneiders, “Spi ity in the Academy,” TS $0 (1989) 676-697. WALTER H. PRINCIPE, CSB SPIRITUALITY, CHRISTIAN (CATHOLIC), HISTORY OF Jewish Antecedents Christian spirituality arose within the Jewish spiritual tradition of God’s abiding presence, faithful covenant love, the living, word of Scripture, the supremacy of divine law, the necessity of worship, and the prac- tice of remembrance. Refined by centuries of development, Jewish belief in God's manifold self-disclosure came to be under- stood as principally mediated by the inner word within the human spirit—conscious- ness, memory, will, and dreams. Public worship remained the focus of national identity, but personal spirituality centered on recollection or attentiveness—the prac- tice of the presence of God. Early Christian spirituality continued in a new and more inclusive way the line of development begun with Abraham. Moses, the prophets, and inspired sages. Discontinuity with Jewish law and custom occurred slowly and partially, beginning with Jesus.