Thursday, December 25, 2008

Christmas Post



MERRY CHRISTMAS!



I know I am cheating. I am writing this is in the afternoon on Christmas Eve. I have requested that this post be posted about an hour and a half after midnight. That should coincide with the end of the Midnight Christmas Vigil.


Do you have Christmas decoration? Is it like this? On the door? Actually, this doesn’t seem to be suitable for Singapore because we don’t have winter here. A wreath made up of the leaves of a pine tree? Perhaps we could look for a Singapore substitute but then it won’t have a Christmassy look. I wonder how the Australians and South American countries decorate for Christmas because it is summer there ...

I found several images on Google. Here is a funny picture I found. Pictures of Christmas decorations were similar to the Northern Hemisphere. The only decoration that would be specifically Australian is a kangaroo wearing a red cap, like the one Santa Claus uses. Here is one example and another at the bottom of the page. South America uses decorations for Christmas that also include symbols more suitable for winter in the Northern Hemisphere.

As the decorations for the Church is not ready and the Christmas Nativity Scene is yet to be complete, I cannot provide pictures that are more suitable for a Catholic Christmas.

So I leave you with the picture of the Christmas tree in the parish house.

Have a Holy Christmas!


 

Wednesday, December 24, 2008

Belief and Blessedness

Besides the eight beatitudes in Matthew 5, there are several others in the four Gospels. I wish to highlight two.

The first is from the Gospel of St. Luke:
As he said this, a woman in the crowd raised her voice and said to him, “Blessed is the womb that bore you, and the breasts that you sucked!” But he said, “Blessed rather are those who hear the word of God and keep it!” (Luke 11:27-28)

There is a lot to be said about the how fitting this beatitude is for the Blessed Virgin. According to the same Gospel, she kept all she had experienced with Jesus in her heart (see 2:19, 51). Our Lady had the Word of God alive in her body and then embodied in her presence for so many years. She had a very personal experience of God’s Word. We might say that she was privileged because of that. If we consider the privilege as being with Jesus, then, Our Lady was very privileged indeed. At the same time, she still had to make a decision to follow God’s will. One should not say that she would naturally follow God’s will because she was physically with the Son of God. There were those who had experienced Jesus personally and yet not follow Him.

We have a similar privilege as Our Lady. We know our Lord personally. There are many who have heard of our Lord but do not know him personally. Some of them belong to other faiths and religions. Quite a number of them profess to be Christian. These are probably those who treat Christianity as a system of beliefs and rites – merely a religion and nothing more. For those of us who know the Lord personally, Christianity is not merely a religion. We have faith in the beliefs because we have a personal relationship with our God. Our belief is not in a system or an impersonal deity but a person. When we believe in a system, we rely on the set of processes determined by a set of rules. In Christianity, there is an added element of a person who loves. Our God has a special and personal relationship with us. He treats us like persons. He respects our freedom and He loves us. It is true that he allows evil and its consequences to occur. It is true that He will refuse us anything that is not right for us. He made the rules and He does not contravene those rule indiscriminately.

The rituals we go through are expressions of our faith. The official Liturgy is an expression of the faith of the whole universal Church. That is why being free and easy with the rubrics can be wrong. The Liturgy is not merely the expression of the local community. The rubrics do allow for flexibility in certain parts of the Mass. These parts are available for the specific expression of the local community. This include the language to be used at the Eucharist. That is why I am not against the celebration of the Mass in Latin. There are people who feel that they can pray better in Latin. There are also people who are more comfortable celebrating the Eucharist in a language that they normally use. These people are not prevented from celebrating the Mass in the vernacular and should not be looked down upon. I know many people who prefer Latin who considers the vernacular contemptible. I pray for these people. They have loved their preference more than their own brothers and sisters. There are also parts of the rubrics that should not be changed. I know of a particular parish priest who decided that everyone should stand at the consecration and when he renovated his parish church building, he removed all kneelers. It seems he had quite a following in his parish. When a new priest was assigned to that parish, part of the congregation refused to kneel even when the new priest tried to explain that the previous priest was mistaken. It seemed that the previous parish priest claimed that he was trained in Liturgy and those parishioners considered the new priest as infringing on their liturgical rights. Even the bishop did not move some of those parishioners! I don’t envy that new priest. It wasn’t an easy situation to manage.

We receive the Word of God through our reading of Scripture and through the Church. We need to keep this Word within us. Besides meditation and reflective prayer based on the Word, we could also do Bible Sharing as a way to keep this Word within our hearts. This keeping of the Word is a lifelong activity. As we would be celebrating the birth of the Word of God as a human being, let us hope that this Word remains alive in our hearts as we keep it.


St. John also has a few beatitudes in his Gospel. One of them is found in his resurrection accounts:
Jesus said to him [Thomas], “Have you believed because you have seen me? Blessed are those who have not seen and yet believe.” (Jn 20:29)

I was about to write a lengthy reflection of this beatitude. I happened to be listening to an Old Time Radio Programme as I was typing this. When I heard the ending, I realised that no matter how much I wrote, it was not going be as effective as listening to this programme. The programme is called Dragnet from 22 December 1953. The show dramatises true case files. If you could listen to this show, you can listen to an MP3 file (to be downloaded) or a streaming M3U file or a Real Player file. Then move to the last paragraph as the following paragraph is a spoiler. If you do not want to listen to the show, then you can read on.

Actually, I subscribe to podcasts from Mevio. All you have to do is search for “Old Time Mystery” or “Old Time Detective” to get some of the best mystery or detective radio shows.


WARNING ** SPOILER ALERT **

The show is about two detectives who were called to a Catholic Mission Church because the baby Jesus in the crib was missing. It was supposed to be based on true case files. Listening to the dialogue, it is definitely from that time period. It wasn’t the gritty type of dialogue you’d expect from the television shows of today. The detectives couldn’t find the statue before morning Mass. In the end, a poor child returned the statue because he wanted to let baby Jesus take the first ride in his little red wagon that the nearby firehouse gave him for Christmas.

** END OF SPOILER **



Children believe easily any representative of what is real. Baby Jesus is but a figurine in the story but the child treated as the real Jesus. I am sure the child knew that the Jesus that died on the cross several months before is that same Jesus in the crib at the baby. The child could not be bothered by small details. All he knows that Jesus is alive and that Jesus loves them. In bringing baby Jesus for a ride, he expresses the belief that Jesus would allow him to look after Him. Christmas is a time when we celebrate the arrival of salvation for the world. How often do we realise the great responsibility we have to ‘look after’ Jesus. So often the name of Jesus is derided and disrespected in our presence. Are we willing to look after Jesus? More importantly, do we believe that Jesus is real and He is depending on us? That boy had not seen Jesus in physically. Yet, he believed in the Son of God.

“Blessed are those who have not seen and yet believe.”

 

Tuesday, December 23, 2008

Persecuted and Persecutor


Picture from Wikimedia. The work of art by Fra Angelico is in the Public Domain. This JPEG picture is a reproduction that is part of a collection of reproductions compiled by The Yorck Project. The compilation copyright is held by Zenodot Verlagsgesellschaft mbH and licensed under the GNU Free Documentation License.

Blessed are those who are persecuted for righteousness’ sake,
for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.

Blessed are you when men revile you and persecute you and utter all kinds of evil against you falsely on my account. Rejoice and be glad, for your reward is great in heaven, for so men persecuted the prophets who were before you.

(Mt 5:10-12)


Many will only consider the first part (v. 10) as the Eighth Beatitude. In reality, without the following two verses (vv. 11-12), the Beatitude is incomplete. This is because the latter part describes what Jesus means by righteousness’ sake. In an earlier post, I described righteousness as God’s righteousness. The righteousness of God is personified in the person of Jesus. Thus, if we are persecuted because of Jesus, we are blessed.

There are many who are persecuted simply because they were Christians. Such was the plight of the martyrs of the early Church. Nero needed a scapegoat for the fires that raged Rome during his reign and he chose the Christians. During the Neronian persecutions, Christians were killed indiscriminately, not taking into account whether the individual Christians were really guilty of the fire or not.

Christians are still persecuted in different ways in different parts of the world. However, there are also many Christians who do not act like Christians. They retaliate by committing acts of violence against those who persecute them, acting contrary to what Jesus taught:
You have heard that it was said, ‘You shall love your neighbor and hate your enemy.’ But I say to you, Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, (Mt 43-44)

In some cases, it is quite understandable, no matter how un-Christian it is, how retaliation occurs. When the persecution takes away the life of a loved one, there is grief. Grief can lead to rage and the need to retaliate overwhelms the mandate to forgive and love. That is why in an earlier Beatitude, Jesus talks about mourning (v. 4). Grief should lead to mourning instead of rage. Christian leadership is important in every community. Without Christian leadership, communities who claim to be Christian might forget the values that Christ taught and end up becoming counter-witnesses. Often the fear of disappearing into oblivion prompts communities to retaliate. Yet Jesus taught:
For whoever would save his life will lose it, and whoever loses his life for my sake will find it. (Mt. 16:25)

The teachings of Christ are not easy to follow if we do not submit to the grace of God. Thus, we should not judge individuals too harshly for failing. Judgement should be reserved to the Lord.

There are usually many people who complain that they are being persecuted for doing what is right. What these people should realise is that by complaining, they are retaliating in some way. Of course, when one is frustrated, one needs to vent. However, when the complaints leads to putting down of the ‘persecutor’, is it not like retaliation? Thus, it is important for us who are frustrated, to choose wisely the people to whom we talk to. If they are usually the same people, there will be no misunderstanding with regards to our ranting.

More importantly, we need to realise that we might be the persecutors instead of the persecuted. Often we vent our frustrations by making life difficult for the people around us. For example, if we are dissatisfied with how our superiors treat us, we might take out our frustrations on those who work with us. Our disapproval of mistakes might be disproportionate to the mistakes made.

More reprehensible would be when we impose our standards on others. Sometimes we put ourselves on a moral high ground, claiming to be good Christians and then proceed to bring down those who do not fit our standards. We fail to see that we are more like the Pharisees and scribes at the time of Jesus than Christian!

I believe that this Beatitude encourages us to humble ourselves and not retaliate. This beatitude encourages us to allow ourselves to be “walked all over” by others for the sake of Christ. We are not asked to be cowards. Rather, we are called to consider the value of Christ’s attitude at His Passion as a lamb led to the slaughter. It is not an easy attitude to adopt but we need to if we truly want to be “Blessed”.

Monday, December 22, 2008

Creating an Environment of Shalom




Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called sons of God. (Mt 5:9)










Picture from Wikimedia. It is in the Public Domain.

When I was in primary school … and that was a long time ago … I remember singing this campfire song:
Shalom my friend!
Shalom my friend!
Shalom … Shalom …
May Peace be with you,
May Peace be with you,
Shalom!
Shalom!
  (Of course, the lines in the middle may be sung “God’s Peace be with you …”)


I was taught at that young age by a Christian teacher that the word shalom meant peace. After I was baptised (I was in my early teens), I remembered a Youth Mission where there was a talk about Peace. I am sure that the idea of shalom was explained there but I have no recollection of it. My memories of that Youth Mission centred around the personalities of Rev. Fr. Brian Doro, C.Ss.R., and the late Rev. Fr. P.J. O'Neil, C.Ss.R. Anyway, it was only during lectures on Sacred Scripture in the seminary that I discovered the rich meaning of the Hebrew word, Shalom.

Shalom means wholeness. When someone greeted another, “Shalom!”, it meant that the greeter hoped that the Lord would grant the one greeted the totality of being. In the Septuagint, the Greek translation of the Old Testament, the Hebrew word shalom was often translated into the Greek soteria, which meant salvation. It makes sense, doesn’t it. God created perfect human beings in the beginning. Sin introduced imperfections, causing human beings to be less that whole. Salvation would be the restoration of that perfect state, being a wholly perfect human being again. The Greek word for peace eirene, means tranquility and harmonious relationship. Eirene is qualitatively less than shalom. Although Jesus probably used Aramaic rather than Greek, there is little doubt that he had the idea of shalom when he presented the beatitudes.

So when Jesus talks about peacemakers, he is speaking of those who make shalom a part of their lives. In our present world of conflicts, we hear of peace-keepers. These are military troops or civilians who maintain conditions that prevent conflict and hostility. The peace that is kept is not even that which is described by eirene. The idea of peace nowadays refers to “the absence of conflict”. Christian peace refers to the state of being whole, being complete, a completeness that only God can give:
Peace I leave with you; my peace I give to you; not as the world gives do I give to you. (Jn 14:27)

So when Jesus talks about being a peacemaker, I think it refers to those people who promote situations where people are able to become whole by the grace of God.

When there is conflict, whether large or small, the Christian response would be reconciliation. Reconciliation is not merely making compromises. It is the active provision of an environment of shalom that would pervade all parties. Suing for peace, no longer means wanting what is good for my party, but wanting the totality of good for all. This means that if I was the aggrieved party, I do not demand justice on my part, but the totality of good for all. To compromise would mean “give and take” on the part of all parties. There would be some things that would be obtained and others that would have to be sacrificed. Peacemaking has no giving up but rather receiving totally from God.

In the pastoral ministry, priests are called to provide environments where their flock can grow at being whole as a human being. Creating environments where shalom can be a reality is the challenge for priests of today. We are so specialized nowadays that we tend to forget that other aspects of being human also exist.

Sunday, December 21, 2008

Purity of Heart




Blessed are the pure in heart, for they shall see God. (Mt 5:8)










Picture from Wikimedia. It is in the Public Domain.


There are several ways we can understand the word “pure”. In the realm of religion, the meaning takes on a moral slant. Purity in thought and deed usually involve the sixth or ninth commandment. We hear the importance of purity in the moral decay of the age.

However, I’d like to look at a more generic meaning of the word “pure”. Like the image above, purity can mean how perfect something is. The image is that of halite, what is commonly known as rock salt. In chemistry, the way a substance crystallizes reveals how pure that substance is. That crystal of sodium chloride in the picture is pure sodium chloride. Yet we can see specks of soil in the crystal. Somehow, the salt crystallized around those particles of soil. Whilst the crystal part is pure sodium chloride, the specks tell us that the crystal, taken as a whole, is not pure. Those specks are impurities. Most pure salt crystals allow light to pass through. You could say that they are transparent. We also gauge how pure something is by judging how clear it is. This is especially true for water. When someone mentions pure water, we think of clear clean water, with no cloudiness or particles, even though the water may have something dissolved in it.

When we consider a more generic meaning to what “pure in heart” means, we can use this idea of clarity. Someone who is “pure in heart” is someone whose heart is clear. Just as we can see clearly through pure water, we can see into the inner being of someone who is “pure in heart”. From the viewpoint of the person who is “pure in heart”, he/she can see things clearly. He/She can see everything as it truly is. If he/she can see Truth clearly, he/she sees God.

So what about the usual meaning for purity? Pope John Paul II uses Genesis 1 and 2 to refer to hearts that are not tainted and so the “pure of heart” refers to the original innocence found in humanity. (see the text of his Audience on 30 January 1980) I believe that if one’s heart is pure and clear, he/she can see the true purpose of his/her body in God’s plan. Gender expression or sexuality is, according to John Paul II and Genesis 1-2, dependent on God’s plan when he created humanity.

In my priestly ministry, I see a lot of moral ambiguity in the world today. The young are bombarded with many conflicting messages. The fashion changes quickly so that a profit can be returned more quickly as well. Hedonism has taken a new face and it is affecting people at a younger age. This means that the situations and problems that used to affect 16 year olds are now affecting 13 or 14 year olds. Adolescent angst seems to hit young people earlier, and girls and boys are engaging in sexual activity earlier than before. Whilst it was rare to hear of a 14 year old girl engaging in sexual activity twenty years ago, now more 13 year old girls are engaging in sexual activity. The world today does nothing but cloud the hearts of people of all ages. Hearts are are getting clouded earlier in a person’s life and God becomes harder to see as a result. This is the challenge of the pastoral ministry in the 21st century.

Saturday, December 20, 2008

Additional Rant 0n 20 Dec 2008

Summa Theologica

There are many people who are now reading the Fathers of the Church and the Summa Theologica. I was asked a question why St. Thomas’ teachings are not given a more prominent place in the Church. I was surprised. I said that they were but the person wanted the Summa up there with the Catechism of the Catholic Church and the Bible. I think we need to get things straight. There is a difference between official revelation and theology — that which is infallible are the teachings of Christ in the Scripture and Sacred Tradition. These teachings are put together in a comprehensive manner in the Catechism of the Catholic Church, which saw its latest expression at the end of the last century. The Church never sets out to teach a theology. It sets out to teach us truths that have been revealed through Jesus and the Church.

What is theology? Theologies are attempts to explain the teachings of the Church. In some instances, specific theological explanations were officially accepted to explain truths within the Catholic Church. For example, the Church had officially accepted the idea of transubstantiation as the explanation on how bread and wine become the Body and Blood of Christ at the Council of Trent. This idea was mooted as far back as the 11th century but not accepted until the 17th century Council. Theological opinions will always be accepted so long as they are not contrary to the truths expressed in Scripture and Tradition. However, they would always be opinions until they are officially (and thus, infallibly) pronounced as part of the deposit of faith. Thus, between the 11th and 17th centuries, transubstantiation had been accepted as a legitimate way of explaining the Real Presence. There was no necessity to accept it as infallible so long as the truth of the Real Presence was believed. It was only in the 17th century, at the Council of Trent, that one had to accept that transubstantiation is the way the bread and wine changes into the Body and Blood of Christ.

Doesn’t this mean that the Church teachings have changed and is thus not infallible? Of course not. Infallibility doesn’t mean cannot change. It means that the teaching is free from error. Unchangeable and error-free are different things altogether. The truths that the Church teaches do not change in the sense that they are true one day and not true the next. However, the way we understand the workings of the truths can change in that we increase the depth of understanding. Thus, while the body of teaching remains the same body of teaching, there is growth in that there is increase.

So, the Summa Theologica is not supposed to be taken on the same level as the Catechism or the Scriptures. For the most part, the work remains a valid way of explaining the truths taught by Jesus, those yet to be officially accepted as part of the infallible teaching remain opinions.

The Catechism mentioned here is the official Catechism of the Catholic Church. Many catechisms published as textbooks for Sunday School or RCIA formation programmes may contain valid theological opinions that should not be considered as official teaching of the Church. An example of this is the question of Limbo. At the earlier part of his pontificate, Pope Benedict XVI suggested that there was no need for the theological opinion that Limbo exists. Some people began to say that the Pope was trying to change the Catechism and the age old teaching of the Church. In reality, the idea of Limbo was never a part of the infallible teaching of the Church. It was a valid theological opinion to explain where babies who were aborted went. These babies could not be baptised, and thus, not able to enter heaven, nor could we say that they were guilty of personal sins that would cause them to be condemned to hell. Some theologians suggested the possibility of a place called Limbo where these souls could go to. They fashioned this place after the Jewish idea of Sheol which we see in the Old Testament (e.g. Gen 37:35; Is 38:10)

Forgiveness and Mercy






Blessed are the merciful, for they shall obtain mercy. (Mt 5:7)




Picture from Wikimedia. It is in the Public Domain.


At first glance, this beatitude seems to follow the ethic of reciprocity (see “Ethic of reciprocity” in Wikipedia), but I think Jesus suggests more than that. I think this is clearer when we rephrase the beatitude thus:
God blesses those who are merciful to others for God will show them mercy.

The blessing is not that people would return the mercy shown them but that God notices those who have been merciful.

What is mercy?

There is an article in the online Catholic Encyclopedia on “Mercy”. For those of us who are more adventurous, the same site offers St. Thomas Aquinas’ treatment on the same subject in the Summa Theologica. I say adventurous because St. Thomas needs some getting used to, especially if we are not familiar with Aristotle and Mediaeval Philosophy. (Please refer to my next short post to read further on what I think is important when reading the Summa Theologica.)

According to the Catholic Encyclopedia, “Mercy as it is here contemplated is said to be a virtue influencing one’s will to have compassion for, and, if possible, to alleviate another’s misfortune.” If I were to put it in simpler terms, mercy is a habit (virtue) that has two functions:
  1. stirs one to have compassion for another person’s misfortune

  2. motivates one to try to help remove the other person’s misfortune


St. Thomas Aquinas and those teaching at his time would teach that when a merciful person discerns misfortune or misery in another, the motivation resulting from mercy is in some sense involuntary. Also, mercy must also be linked to charity as it is something the controls relations between two distinct persons.

One result of a merciful heart is the willingness to forgive. For many people forgiveness is like a switch that can be turned on or off. For these people, they will soon realise, especially when they are gravely hurt, that forgiveness cannot be simply switched on or off. Their first misunderstanding is that forgiveness is a feeling. A similar misunderstanding is that love is a feeling. Of course, there are feelings involved in forgiveness and love. However, they are not primarily feelings. Forgiveness, like love, is a decision, what philosophers would call, “an act of the will.” Mothers will definitely be able to identify with this idea. When a child has wilfully done something wrong, a mother may feel very indignant and angry but it doesn’t mean that the mother has stopped loving the child.

A merciful person is motivated to forgive; he wants to forgive because he is aware of God’s love for both himself and the one who hurt him. However, it is very difficult to reconcile the feeling of hurt and anger with that decision to forgive. It is difficult. It is also imperative for our immortal souls to forgive despite our feeling. Now to forgive is not to forget the hurt. Neither is it to forget that anything happened between the two people. Thus, the saying “forgive and forget” can be dangerously misleading. To forgive means to choose to treat a person as if he/she has not hurt me even though I know he/she has. To forgive doesn’t mean I forget and set myself up to be hurt again. To forgive doesn’t mean that I allow that person to hurt me again. On the contrary, to forgive means to give a person a second chance so that he/she would be able to do the right thing and not hurt again. It means that if that person is about to repeat the same thing, I must charitably warn that person of the consequences of his/her actions. I could go on and on about this but I choose not to be too long.

All the above is very easily said, but not easily done. There is one ingredient missing: God. We are emotional beings and we would cease to be human if we weren’t. To be merciful means we need to depend on God. The habit of choosing to forgive and love can only come about if we allow God to heal all the hurts deriving from the offence. Most people find that their emotions go on a roller coaster the moment they try to forgive. To confront a hurt before healing begins is diastrous. One feels hypocritical: I say I forgive when there is this emotion in me that pushes me to hit back!

Healing. That is the missing link between being hurt and forgiving. When someone offends us, we are hurt. Our spiritual being is hurt. Like a physical wound, we need to tend to it and allow it to heal. God provides the healing but we must take care not to cause more damage to the wound. If we dwell on the incident, it is like someone taking out the bandages of a treated wound just to touch and see that it is healing. We know that in any physical wound, constant removal of the dressing and probing would not only not speed up healing, it may even cause the wound to turn septic and cause even more pain. When we dwell on a painful memory, this is what we are doing. We probe and dig further into the hurt, causing more pain. When we begin a healing process by inviting the Lord into our beings, we should leave the ‘bandages and dressing’ well alone. We will feel the hurt, just like in the case of a physical wound. When some time has passed, we may be tempted to return to the hurt, much like a healing wound would itch. We have to let go of the hurt and put it aside, allowing the Lord to do His healing. One of the problems with “forgive and forget” concerns healing as well. If we forget that there is a bandage over a physical wound, we may end up carelessly hurting our wound or ruining the dressing. Similarly, if we totally shut off the incident from our mind, a more devastating emotional upheaval may be triggered by an trival matter.

One of the most common experiences is that the hurtful incident just comes in without one’s willing it. Actually, our memories are not random. We don't just remember things. Memory is associative. We are reminded of something in the past due to something we see or hear or even another memory. One of the best ways to handle a recurrence of a hurtful memory is to immediately turn our thoughts to “what was I thinking of before remembering?” As we consciously trace the memory to its source, we actually leave the hurtful memory in the background. We are aware that it is there but we are focusing on something else, much like when we try to ignore a healing wound that itches. Another benefit can be gained from this exercise: we begin to see what the triggers of the hurtful memories are. For example, if a couple of siblings quarreled over a case of wine, the train of though might be:
Case of wine which was triggered by grapes which was triggered by raisins which were triggered by fruitcake which was triggered by cherries which was triggered by the brand of chocolate called Mon Cherié.
See how something totally unrelated could have ended up reminding us of a hurtful incident. So if we are aware of those things that are often leading us back to the hurtful memories, we might be able to shift our thoughts the moment these ‘risky’ thoughts entered our minds.

How do I know that I am healed? When I can truly laugh off the hurtful incident even if I feel a tinge of discomfort, it would be safe to consider the healing 99% complete.

I know that I will inadvertently hurt people in my speech and decisions. There are times when I will hurt people in my own frustrations. This is something that would happen because I am still a sinner. This is something that I tell myself every time I am hurt. The virtue or habit of mercy needs to be nurtured with time. When I need to make the decision to forgive, I go through the steps above to get healed and consciously make the decision to forgive and love. Ultimately, I know that co-operating with God in this way will help me become the merciful person he has called me to be.