I've wanted to post the following piece on this blog ever since I heard Bob Marckini read a portion of it when he was here at Loma Linda last month. He sent it to me today.
From time to time I've mentioned the idea that curing a pathology and healing a person are related but different. Both are important, but the spiritual, relational, and emotional aspects of healing give it an edge. I'd go so far as to say that curing without healing is terribly inadequate, while healing without curing is sometimes the best that can be done and, in fact, is sufficient. I first read about this difference some years ago in a book on Jesus written by John Dominic Crossan who suggested that, whether or not Jesus cured diseases may be open to debate, but that he healed people is certain.
Although Loma Linda pioneered proton treatment as a cure for cancer, what really convinced me to come here was the expectation of healing. The healing has to do with Loma Linda's mission to make man whole. I have not been disappointed.
The author of the following piece is Fred Recklau, apparently a Lutheran pastoral theologian. I know nothing more about him, Googling his name will turn up multiple sites that present these contrasts. They're worth repeating here.
Cure acts upon another; Healing shares with another.
Cure manages; Healing touches.
Cure seeks ultimately to conquer pain; Healing seeks to transcend the pain.
Cure ignores grief; Healing assumes grief.
Cure encourages mystery as a challenge for understanding; Healing encounters mystery as a ready channel for meaning.
Cure rejects death and views it as defeat; Healing includes death among the blessed outcomes of caring.
Cure may occur without healing; Healing may occur without cure.
Cure separates body from soul; Healing embraces the soul.
Cure tends to isolate; Healing tends to incorporate.
Cure combats illness; Healing fosters wellness.
Treatment count: 42 down, 3 to go.
No comments:
Post a Comment