Methodist Statement On Spiritual Healing

Press, Volume CIII, Issue 30531, 28 August 1964, Page 12

Methodist Statement On Spiritual Healing

A statement on spiritual healing was adopted by the North Canterbury Methodist Synod for study by Methodist congregations. The statement was criticised by some members of the synod, the Rev. D. W. Edmonds calling it “very disturbing” and “humanistic.” “Wrong emphasis in spiritual healing” were warned against in the report. It was wrong to blame those who prayed if healing did not take place, and there were dangers of trying to manipulate God and of regarding physical health as the supreme good. Moreover, spiritual healing could not heal gross deformities, and there were dangers of hysteria and distress in large public healing services.

“Today God has chosen to lead predominantly through the ministries of the medical and allied prefessions,” ' said the report. “There is no conflict between a trusting belief in God’s will and power to heal and the acceptance of the benefit of modern medicine. “Every service of worship has therapeutic value and gives the right atmosphere for the laying on of hands, especially in conjunction with Holy Communion. “What God will do in various kinds of illness is not for man to decide. What He does do we must slowly learn.” Report Criticised Mr Edmonds said the statement “avoided Biblical material which should be included.” There was no reference to Christ’s injunction, “Heal the sick.” “Christ said, ‘Whatever you ask in My name I will give you.’ Do we believe this, or are we trying to explain it away?” Mr Edmonds asked. “Often we don’t see much because we don’t expect it,” he added.

Mr F. R. Silby thought it was a timid report. "We need something practical and determined,” he said. The Rev. I. K. Hopper said the emphasis in the statement was on the spiritual aspect of healing. The Rev. G. V. Thomas said the statement was meant for .discussion only.

The Rev. W. S. Dawson, convener of the committee

which prepared the statement, said the intention was to give the consensus of the Church. “It was not the committee’s job to say everything,” he added.