Archive
RSS Feed
DonateJuly 9, 2006 |
See also: [Year B Archive] |
2 Samuel 5:1-5, 9-10
Psalm 48
2 Corinthians 12:2-10
Mark 6:1-13
Today’s scriptures examine the nature of power—divine and human—and invite us to reflect on what we can expect of God and what we can expect of ourselves in the interplay of divine and human power.
Many Christians to assume that divine omnipotence means that God can do anything God wants at will and without regard to love or logic. In fact, while many Christians have defined omnipotence in terms of the divine determination of all things, either before the creation of the universe in God’s “eternal now” or in the unfolding of the universe, even these Christians place limits of rationality and morality on divine omnipotence – God cannot make a circle square and God cannot do anything contrary to God’s loving intent for the universe, however the scope of divine love is defined.
Process theologians have added a new dimension to the understanding of divine omnipotence by noting that God’s power is relational rather than coercive in nature. While God’s power is unsurpassable, it is also congruent with creaturely freedom. God’s impact on the universe is surely awesome in setting the boundaries of cosmic order, providing the possibilities from which each occasion of experience emerges, and luring the universe, one moment and being at a time toward novelty. God is the ubiquitous energy, seeking beauty, complexity, justice, and love, “in whom we live and move and have our being.” God provides the ultimate structures of life and guides their evolution over the multi-billion year journey of a billion galaxies. We can expect God constantly to provide new possibilities and the energy to embody these possibilities in our lives, but we cannot expect God to insure that all our projects succeed or that all of our prayers are answered in terms of our desires.
In today’s New Testament readings, the question of power emerges. As a result of his hometown neighbors’ skepticism, Jesus’ power to heal persons is limited. “And he could do no deed of power there, except that he laid hands on a few sick people and cured them. And he was amazed at their unbelief.”
Jesus noted that we are all connected to the divine vine, and that immense divine energy is always available to us. We wither when we are disconnected, or disconnect ourselves, from that ever-present and transformative divine energy. (John 15) By our inattention, lack of focus, unbelief, as well as a result of the impact of unjust social situations, we may turn away, or be alienated from, God’s passion for our lives and the divine energy that propels us to realize God’s aim for our lives.
In the Gospel reading, Jesus experiences limits to his power. As God’s representative, Jesus limitations point to the possibility that divine power itself can be conditioned by our faith and behavior. Jesus’ healing power is relational in nature. Indeed, if we look at the majority of the healing stories, Jesus heals as a result of the interplay of his loving power and the openness of a person or community. Divine power, as revealed in Jesus’ life and teaching, is – as Bernard Loomer asserted – relational rather than coercive. God elicits our creativity and rejoices in our freedom. God gives the universe space in which to grow and freedom with which to shape God’s vision for each and everything.
While I believe that television healers provide help for a percentage of their listeners, the emphasis of their programs may also lead to false expectations that hinder God’s healing presence in many persons’ lives. The apparent cure rate at these televised services is 100%. No one walks back to their seat disappointed. Only the successful cures show up on television! But, there are few televised follow-ups of the long-term results of prayer and laying of hands on these programs, nor are there any stories of those who aren’t cured and must live faithfully with their illnesses. Evidence suggests that that the majority of persons go home with little or no long-term improvement. Many feel that their own lack of faith has stood between them and the healings “everyone else” is receiving.
Even studying the benefits of prayer can be theologically and spiritually problematic. Several years ago physicians and spiritual leaders, myself included, spoke glowingly of the studies that indicated that intercessory prayer is associated with positive health benefits in cardiac patients. Recently, a much larger study has shown little discernable difference in outcome between those who were prayed for and those who were not in these double-blind medical studies. To the surprise of many, those who were told that they were the objects of others’ prayers actually fared worse than the “control” group who received no prayers at all!
These studies raise some interesting issues. By definition, the studies exclude three essential aspects of process-relational theology. First, the studies do not, and cannot (in accordance with the canons of the scientific method), study the impact of God’s presence in our lives. Though God does not determine events unilaterally from a process perspective, still God seeks the “best for impasse,” whether we are healthy or ill. Second, the studies attempt to chart a person’s health outcome apart from studying their other relationships and environmental context. Process-relational theology sees our health and every other aspect of our lives as the result of many factors, including our attitudes, past experiences, unconscious factors, immediate and indirect environment, social expectations, as well as God’s presence and the prayers of others. Finally, these studies focus on a discrete period of time and not the long-term benefits of intercessory prayer in persons’ lives. We can never predict the impact of faithful prayers in transforming persons’ lives over the long haul.
Despite the ambiguity of the prayer studies, I still pray for others and believe that my prayers bring something of value into their lives. In a relational universe, our prayers make a difference, even if they are not immediately registered in our health condition. Even if there is no cure, our prayers and God’s activity may contribute to the experience of a “peace that surpasses understanding” as we face chronic illness and death.
Paul’s autobiographical sketch also reflects on the nature of healing power. Despite his mystical experiences and fervent prayers, the unknown “thorn in the flesh” still torments Paul physically. Although we may disagree with his explanation for the persistence of his illness – “therefore to keep me from being too elated, a torn was given me in the flesh, a messenger of Satan to torment me, to keep me from being too elated.” – we can affirm the insight Paul gains from his encounter with God, “my grace is sufficient for you, for power is made perfect in weakness.” Paul does not receive an answer to his prayers for a cure, but he does receive an enduring spiritual healing that enables him to experience peace in the midst of pain and debilitation. This may be the greatest healing of all.
The words “healing power” can be understood in, at least, two ways – 1) God’s power to heal us and our experience of divine power in our lives and 2) the healing of our concepts of power, both divine and human. Process-relational thought “heals” our images of divine power by emphasizing divine power as supportive and relational, rather than coercive and unilateral. Still, we need to heal our images of human power. Some theologians suggest that unilateral images of divine power lead to unilateral, authoritarian, and coercive images of human power, especially in the affairs of nations.
There is always a danger that a nation will come to believe that God has chosen it for a unique and unsurpassable role in human history. The Psalm and the reading from Samuel explore the nature of “empire.” God has lifted up Zion and its ruler David. “And David became greater and greater, for the Lord, the God of hosts was with him.” In an interdependent world, we cannot deny that nations, like persons and moments of experience in our lives, may have particular “vocations.” But, these vocations are not exclusive. Visions of unilateral power breed dreams of empire and conquest. Visions of relational power inspire dreams of international cooperation and peace.
In a dynamic-relational world, all things must pass, and that includes the empires that vie for our loyalty. Our patriotism and love of country is important, especially as it inspires us to acts of interpersonal, community, and global justice and peace-making, but our love of nation must be balanced by the recognition that others also love their nations and see their lands as having unique gifts and vocations. As the bumper sticker notes, “God bless everyone, no exceptions.”
Mark’s Gospel portrays Jesus sending his disciples out two by two as an example of God’s “healing power” in our lives. Unlike the rulers of the earth, they travel simply and affirm their need of others in order to live their vocation. Jesus’ disciples are challenged to see their healing vocation as relational. Vulnerable and dependent, they mediate God’s healing touch to others. In the healing adventure, giving and receiving are interdependent. The generosity of others enables us to fulfill our vocations. The disciples accept hospitality, but also do not blame or punish those who turn their backs on them. They let go of failure, knowing that success is not entirely in their own hands. They can’t control the belief or unbelief of others. Freed of the need to succeed, they simply go on to the next healing adventure. Great things happen!
As God’s partners in healing the world, we need to cultivate healthy models of relational power, whether we are active in church administration and governance, social transformation, or healing ministry. Our task is simply to seek our own and others’ healing in every circumstance without assuming a particular response among those to whom we minister. While this path seems “weak” in its gentleness toward others and its refusal to manipulate or coerce others, it is truly the enduring path of divine-human relatedness “for whenever I am weak, then I am strong.”
Bruce Epperly is director of continuing education and professor of practical theology at Lancaster Theological Seminary. He is the author of God’s Touch: Faith, Wholeness, the Healing Miracles of Jesus and The Power of Affirmative Faith; and co-author of The Call of the Spirit: Process Spirituality in a Relational World. These titles are available from the Process & Fatih bookstore.
If you found this lectionary helpful, please consider contributing to Process & Faith by making a donation or becoming a member.