Is healing dependent on the faith of the receiver, or is it purely a
sovereign act of God? What, if any, are the pre-requisites for
receiving healing?
Introduction
Faith Healing is a controversial subject not just in the church but
in the world. When discussed, it touches on painful stories of
children dying as their parents gather prayer groups, and, of
miraculous acts where people walk out of wheelchairs. There seems to
be a great gulf between the miraculous and the negligent as the
pre-requisites set forward within scripture are taken to the extremes
of hyper-christianity or atheism. Is there more to healing than the
miraculous and the tragic? Are the common views of healing, faith and
of God's sovereignty unable to lend a perspective that allow us to
accept both situations and still not blame someone when the
supernatural fails to materialise?
Three Case Studies
To begin, there are three cases of bodily illness and the actions of
the people involved to consider.
Joni Eareckson Tada is a well known name in christian circles and
her struggles with the health of her body is well documented. Her
battle with quadriplegia, chronic pain and recently breast cancer
have her described as a modern Job. Today she is still in a
wheelchair and is receiving chemotherapy (Bailey, 30-33 : 2010).
George (real name withheld) was diagnosed with Leukaemia. His
Oncologist gave little chance for him to survive it at all. George's
Psychologist, Pastor and Oncologist worked together with his family
and did the best they could. People eagerly prayed for healing of his
body, yet, this did not happen. George died at home in the arms of
his wife and with his children around him. His Psychologist, David
Aldridge author of “Spirituality, Healing and Medicine:
Return to the Silence” declares that George was healed in his
life, in his relationships with his family and in himself. Healing
occurred, just not the bodily healing that people prayed for
(Aldridge 11-12 : 2000).
Dean Michael Heilman died of complications due to undiagnosed
haemophilia after cutting his foot in his back yard. He was twenty
two months old, his parents we part of a church that emphasised faith
healing as set out in James 5. Dean Michael died while his family
prayed for him in the church building (Peters, 1-5 : 2008).
After the emotional stirrings and the accusations have died down and
after each of us has decided where we stand on this issue, only then
is it possible to look at faith healing and the sovereignty of God.
James 5 and the How to of Healing
Scripture talks of healing and the miracles of Jesus and the
Apostles. The blind saw, the lame walked and many were healed of
other ailments. James 5 sets out a “how to” when it comes healing
ecclesiastically. After taking into account James 5 and the acts of
healing in the scriptures, the process of healing can be broken down
in to the following. Identification, Petition and Action.
Identification is realisation of the absence of order. This can be
sickness, illness, malady of an individual, a community, a nation, or
all of creation. Petitioning of the deity for remedy, to bring order
to the malady that has been noticed and seen for the injustice that
it is. Action is the miraculous part when God in his divine wisdom
moves, intervenes, restores order to bring about healing. James 5
speaks of the identification (“is there anyone sick?”), and the
petition as actions for the community to do, in faith (the elders to
pray and the oil to anoint). The action is to be expected and we are
to wait for it. The Old Testament gives insight that God approves of
the desire to be healed. King Asa did not look to God for his healing
like King Hezekiah did and Asa was condemned for it. The situation is
that healing can come, even when faith is scarce, but, that there are
those who are healed and those who are not (Schwab & Monroe, 126
: 2009). People prayed for Joni, George and Dean Michael, yet their
bodies were not been restored to perfect health. In fact all three
suffered and God did not do what was asked of Him. This leads us to
question either God or the supplicant.
Option 1 : Blame the Supplicant
Despite similar faith in the healing power of God Joni, Gorge and
Dean were not healed physically. The deaths of George and Dean were
not what the honest petitions were asking for, but asking is only the
second step and it needs to be done in faith. What is required is the
belief that God has the ability to bring healing. Not an ultimatum or
a surety that God will heal all sickness now! The example of the
leper in Matthew 8 who asks if Jesus is willing is the state of faith
required. The weight is not to be placed on the supplicant's faith,
but, should be a confidence that God in his compassion and goodness
can do. With the understanding that God may not (Deere 125-127).
Placing the fault at the grieving family members and the deceased
over a lack of faith is only adding insult and shame on top of their
grief. Joni offers hope that suffering is not connected to sin. Her
discovery is that there is no shame in being not healed. Suffering
may be part of peoples lives, but, to not have suffering denies the
fact that this world is difficult and not just a soft ride (Bailey,
31 : 2012). Monroe and Schwab in “God as Healer : A Closer Look at
Biblical Images of Inner Healing with Guiding Questions for
Counselors” point at the western concept of healing which denies
suffering, where the modern motto of a healthy body is everything.
Their view is that this motto has influenced peoples understanding in
thinking that God wants all of us to be well. This is not a biblical
concept, as there are times when God denies healing (John 9, 2 Cor
12:7). God's reason is that suffering will benefit the individual
(Schwab & Monroe, 126 : 2009). Joni agrees with this quoting 1
Peter 2:21 that God calls us to suffering, that, in her own suffering
she has learned much about God's character. Her belief is that it is
an issue of perception that on this side of eternity we do not
clearly see God's design (Bailey, 30 -31 : 2010).
Option 2 : Blaming God
If the supplicant's faith is not the culprit, then surely God must
be. If God chooses who gets healed
God is merely capricious, if God is using suffering then perhaps God
is malicious. Conclusions such as these play into the hands of the
cynical who paint God as either not powerful enough or not good
because there is suffering. The unfortunate reality is that this is
what is thought and said. Thinking about such suffering and the lack
of God's intervention has lead to Bart Ehrman's de-conversion. Ehrman
went from believing that God acts in the world to not being able to
conceive that God could exist because of suffering. He cannot see
good in God when so many people suffer while so few get healed at all
(Ehrman, 126 : 2009). Ehrman's argument is similar to those who
attest that God heals all the time. The expectation of total healing
and the absence of suffering is not consistent with our world. Both
extremes expect an absence of suffering and that God is obligated
because of his power and goodness to make this happen. There is a
reciprocal expectation that because the steps of healing in James 5
were performed exactly then God will act. An occult rite is seen in
this fashion, where the right actions performed compel the entity to
act. Barry Chant writes about the James 5 order explaining that the
three steps of Identification, Petition and Action should be done as
part of regular church life. Chant also adds that healing is not just
a bodily healing, but, an holistic healing of the entire person. That
healing deals with the emotional and spiritual scars not just bodily
illness (Chant ,72 : 1993). Aldridge agrees pointing out that George
whose body failed because of Leukaemia was healed in his family
relationships and in himself. That despite his body failing, George
was healed (Aldridge, 12 : 2000). There is more to this than blaming
the faith of the supplicant or calling God weak or malicious because
of suffering.
Just What is Healing?
“The Concise Dictionary of
Christian Theology” describes healing as the “restoration of
health, whether physical, metal and spiritual.” (Erickson, 86 :
2001), this is followed by Healing, the gift of. Erickson makes a
distinction between the two and he is not the only one. Chant points
to a difference between the gift and the petitions that should be a
normal part of church life (Chant, 72-73 : 1993). Boa tells us that
the miraculous gift of healing is given by God as he uses his people
as the instrument to bring healing.They are conduits not specialists
who decide who is healed or not (Boa, 2001 : 308). How do we compare
this to the sad situation of Dean Micheal? Why did God not bring
about healing for this child? How can we look at miracles and
suffering declaring that faith and the sovereignty of God is
required?
Healing is a gift given by God as a sign to what will come. Healing
is there to point those who require a demonstration of power to God.
Kraybill, in “The Upsidedown Kingdom” explains the healing
ministry of Christ was a sign that the favourable year of the Lord
had come (Kraybill 212 : 2011). Glasser in “Announcing the Kingdom”
writes that healing is there to point to the glory of God and to the
future fulfilment of the Kingdom of God where all sin, sickness and
even death will be done away with (Glasser, 206 : 2003). That the
mission of Christ and the church involves these signs and wonders to
amplify the words and actions of ministry in power (Glasser, 341 :
2003). To this Glasser warns that healing and the other gifts should
not be sullied by thinking it is God magic. God cannot be bound to
our will, it is us who must submit to his (Glasser, 342 : 2003). As
Mr. Beaver says to the Pevensies in “The Lion, the Witch and the
Wardrobe.” “He's not a tame Lion.”(Lewis, 166 : 1968). Or, as
God asks Job “Where you there when the foundations of the world
were made.?” (Job 38:4). To blame God, or, to treat Him as an
entity that can be manipulated by performing a rite is to not
understand what healing is. Healing points to a time when even death
is dead. Where, if we believe the promise of scripture Joni, George
and Dean Michael will enter into the fulfilment of the Kingdom of God
and suffer no more.
Two ways to see God, not just one.
How did the understanding of healing as a sign change into a form of
God magic? One way of looking at the problem of how to see healing,
involves how we attempt to understand God. Shawn Wamsley points to
the difference between the “mystical and the intellectual” or the
Apophatic and Katapahtic (Wamsley np, 2009). The modern kataphatic
way of thinking and reasoning downplays the mystical or apophatic.
Our faith becomes what we know about God and these gifts of God are
closer to faith than knowledge. The experience of healing is a
mystical one, where what is seen and known logically is surpassed by
the gift God bestows. When you try and take away the apophatic of God
he becomes something less than the amazing God who made all things,
he becomes a tame lion you can order around. This is not to cast off
the known and defined, to ignore scholastic endeavours for a mystical
faith. We require both the known and the unknown together to gain an
understanding of God that is tangible and intangible, mysterious and
defined.
The Importance of an Eschatological Hope
The modern hero of eschatology, N.T. Wright has his own view on the
issue which explains healing as part of the future then, that is
brought into the now. Wright's argument in “The Road to New
Creation” is that the belief that “IT”, is all about the
individual draws us away from the fact that “IT”, is about God.
We are not the centre of the universe, this is the rightful place of
God. By taking our eyes off God as the centre we loose the great
promise of the future he has prepared for us. Heaven is transformed
into an escape from the material into the spiritual. The material
world we exist in now is of no consequence. Revelation talks of the
great joy coming when creation will be fully restored (Wright, 1-3 :
2006). Jesus was the first fruits of this promised day that is
waiting for all of us. It is this promise that the sign of healing
points to, “it is a little bit of new creation, coming forwards to
meet us in the present.” (Wright, 3 : 2006).
Conclusion
To give an answer to the question of whether healing is dependant on
the faith of the receiver or depends on the sovereignty of God, it
would be yes. Healing is dependant on the faith of the receiver, the
believers are to identify the malady and to petition God for the
healing to bring restoration. Healing comes from God because God is
sovereign and in control, able to act in his creation anyway he deems
necessary. This is not because God is capricious but because God's
plans are beyond our expectations. God's plan is complete and
involves the restoration of ALL of his creation not just the healing
of those who ask by following the correct pre-requisites. God uses
suffering to his purpose in our lives. The death of Dean Michael
cannot be seen as anything but tragic, but, there is hope in God's
complete plan. Healing is a gift, a sign, it comes from the future
where illness and suffering are no more. A material future where
Dean Michael runs and plays without fear. It heralds the power and
love of God giving notice that there is more than the world in which
we live now. What we know and teach is only part of the amazingly
deep and mysterious God that we worship and praise. He is no tame
lion and to restrict our understanding to a reciprocal deity who
complies to the performed rite is not a God but a genie.
Bibliography
Bibliography
Aldridge, D. (2000). Spirituality,
Healing and Medicine: Return to the Silence. London : Jessica
Kingsley Publishers.
Bailey, S.P. (2010). Something Greater Than Healing. Christianity Today. (54)10 : 30-33.
Bailey, S.P. (2010). Something Greater Than Healing. Christianity Today. (54)10 : 30-33.
Boa. K.D. (2001). Conformed
to his image: Biblical and practical approaches to spiritual
formation. Grand Rapids, MI : Zondervan.
Chant, B. (1993). Spiritual
Gifts : A Reappraisal A Biblical and practical handbook.
Sydney, Australia : Tabor Publications.
Ehrman, B.D.(2009). God's
Problem : How the Bible Fails to Answer Our Most Important Question –
Why We Suffer. NY:
Harper Collins.
Erickson, M.J (2001). Concise
dictionary of Christian theology. Wheaton, IL : Good News.
Glasser, A.F. (2003). Announcing
the Kingdom: The Story of God's Mission in the Bible.
Grand Rapids, MI : Baker Academic.
Kraybill, D. B. (2011). The Upside-Down Kingdom.. Harrisonburg,
Virginia, USA : Herald Press
Lewis, C.S. (1968). The
Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe.
Middlesex, England : Penguin Books.
Peters, S.F.(2008). When
Prayer Fails: Faith Healing, Children, and the Law.
NY : Oxford University Press.
Schwab, P.G. and Monroe, G. (2009).
God as Healer- A Closer Look at Biblical Images of Inner Healing with
Guiding Questions for Counselors. Journal
of Psychology & Christianity. (28)2
: 121-129.
Wright,
N.T. (2006). The Road to
New Creation. Available
Internet (http://www.ntwrightpage.com/sermons/Road_New_Creation.htm)
(20th May 2012)
Wamsley, S. (2009).
Toward a Pentecostalism We Can All Practice:
how modernism
ruined the mystical. Available Internet
(http://theophiliacs.com/2009/12/01/toward-a-pentecostalism-we-can-all-practice-how-modernism-ruined-the-mystical/)
(11th May 2012)
No comments:
Post a Comment