Sometimes a phrase just leaps out of the Bible at me. This familiar passage has taken on new emphasis these past months:
And there was a woman who had had a discharge of blood for twelve years, and though she had spent all her living on physicians, she could not be healed by anyone. Luke 8:43
Twelve years – that’s a long time.
Because of the access I’ve been given to medical insurance wherever I have worked, we aren’t bankrupt. That is a huge grace from God.
And we’ve also still spent a great deal of money on physicians. We still don’t know what is causing Paul’s ‘episodes.’ I think I understand a little of that’s woman’s desperation.
A simple touch of Jesus’ garment was all that God used to heal her – no words from Jesus, no touch, no mud.
Unfortunately, ‘faith healers’ have abused this passage where Jesus concludes by saying, “Daughter, your faith has made you well; go in peace.” They point to this and accuse those who continue to live with disability of not having enough faith to be healed.
That’s just wrong. Romans 12:3-8 highlight how wrong it is:
3 For by the grace given to me I say to everyone among you not to think of himself more highly than he ought to think, but to think with sober judgment, each according to the measure of faith that God has assigned. 4 For as in one body we have many members, and the members do not all have the same function, 5 so we, though many, are one body in Christ, and individually members one of another. 6 Having gifts that differ according to the grace given to us, let us use them: if prophecy, in proportion to our faith; 7 if service, in our serving; the one who teaches, in his teaching;8 the one who exhorts, in his exhortation; the one who contributes, in generosity; the one who leads, [6] with zeal; the one who does acts of mercy, with cheerfulness.
We have not earned our faith – we have been given it! We have different gifts according to the grace given to us! We are to use our gifts for the sake of the body!
And what do you do with Paul, who was used by God to actually heal people? He prayed about his thorn in the flesh (2 Corinthians 12:1-10) and it was not removed. Rather, he concluded:
Three times I pleaded with the Lord about this, that it should leave me. But he said to me, “My grace is sufficient for you, for my power is made perfect in weakness.” Therefore I will boast all the more gladly of my weaknesses, so that the power of Christ may rest upon me. For the sake of Christ, then, I am content with weaknesses, insults, hardships, persecutions, and calamities. For when I am weak, then I am strong. 2 Corinthians 12:8-10
Jesus knows what we need! Jesus is our strength! If he heals, it is to bring greater glory to God. If he doesn’t heal, he uses it to draw us more closely to him. Both are good things.
I love this old hymn that reminds me – my hope is built on him, not on me:
My Hope Is Built on Nothing Less
My hope is built on nothing less
Than Jesus’ blood and righteousness;
I dare not trust the sweetest frame,
But wholly lean on Jesus’ name.
When darkness veils His lovely face,
I rest on His unchanging grace;
In every high and stormy gale,
My anchor holds within the veil.
His oath, His covenant, His blood
Support me in the whelming flood;
When all around my soul gives way,
He then is all my hope and stay.
When He shall come with trumpet sound,
Oh, may I then in Him be found;
Dressed in His righteousness alone,
Faultless to stand before the throne.
Refrain:
On Christ, the solid Rock, I stand;
All other ground is sinking sand,
All other ground is sinking sand.
Read Full Post »
The Works of God 
Some wisdom and warning from 90 years ago
Posted in commentary, Quotes on January 4, 2011| 1 Comment »
When my sister introduced me to G.K. Chesterton more than 20 years ago, I had little idea how much he would influence how I read and think.
Recently I came across a piece he did on eugenics, which to his horror was rising in popularity at the turn of the 20th century, and even into the 1970’s had public proponents. Like those who advocate for abortion, and seem to particularly advocate for it when a pre-born child is shown to have disabilities, much of that movement was based on ‘the good of society’ and the economic and psychological benefits to families.
Chesterton would have none of it, and pointed out the duplicity of asserting the ‘feeble-minded’ (those we would say today live with cognitive disabilities) bring harm to society or families when the real problem lay with those who violently force their will on others:
Even if I were a Eugenist, then I should not personally elect to waste my time locking up the feeble-minded. The people I should lock up would be the strong-minded. I have known hardly any cases of mere mental weakness making a family a failure; I have known eight or nine cases of violent and exaggerated force of character making a family a hell. If the strong-minded could be segregated it would quite certainly be better for their family and friends. And if there is really anything to heredity, it would be better for posterity too. For the kind of egoist I mean is a madman in a much more plausible sense then the mere harmless ‘deficient’; and to hand on the horrors of anarchic and insatiable temperament is a much graver responsibility than to leave a mere inheritance of childishness. . .
Why do not the promoters of the Feeble-Minded Bill call at the many grand houses in town or country where such (strong-minded) nightmares notoriously are? Why do they not knock at the door and take the bad squire away? Why do they not ring the bell and remove the dipsomaniac prize-fighter? I do not know; and there is only one reason I can think of, which must remain a matter of speculation. When I was at school, the kind of boy who liked teasing half-wits was not the sort that stood up to bullies.
G.K. Chesterton, Eugenics and Other Evils, Cassell and Company, 1922, pp. 51-52.
That’s a straight shot directly into the evil that is the tyranny of the powerful over the powerless when we are not guided by higher, transcendent, universal principles. Chesterton saw it clearly: the powerful were defining what was acceptable (and the ‘feeble-minded’ were not acceptable) and pronouncing judgment over those who could not defend themselves.
But, one might argue, we have become much more enlightened than 80 years ago. We have laws and strict rules about bullying and teasing. We have whole school programs dedicated to peace and conflict resolution. We have rules and regulations to protect those with disabilities. We have curb cuts and elevators and dedicated parking spaces. Our public face is very much different, so we must be different.
Unless one looks at the war against our most defenseless children in the womb. We applaud the young man with Down syndrome who lives in a community, participates in Special Olympics and maybe holds a job – and eliminate more than 9 out of 10 children like him when Down syndrome is discovered in the womb.
What would Chesterton say about our public applause and our private, socially sanctioned, extraordinarily effective modern eugenics campaign? What name can we give it but murderous hypocrisy?
Share this:
Read Full Post »