spirit and healing in africa - University of the Free State

spirit and healing in africa - University of the Free State spirit and healing in africa - University of the Free State

etd.uovs.ac.za
from etd.uovs.ac.za More from this publisher
23.06.2013 Views

materiality 56 . The relation between God and the world involves materiality, ‘the dust of the ground’. In other words, the physicality of creation is the only site where the Spirit can present God’s love for the world. Bodies and other tangible forms of life are indispensable manifestations of God’s grace and commitment to the world. They are needed in order to understand and experience the quality of God-given life. These quality-bearers embody the contingency of creation: our bodies reveal our dependence (since we do not own the breath of life) and they represent the non-necessity of human life. The orderliness of the body can be disrupted, an illness can occur, and death can come at any time. In revealing the contingency of human life, bodies represent the vulnerability of creation. In relation to the contingency of creation, Christian theology in general has developed an ambiguous relationship with physicality. On the one hand, Christianity can be seen as a body religion par excellence, considering the crucial meaning of the incarnation of God and of Christ’s body that carried away the sin of mankind. On the other hand, Christianity is familiar with the idea that the body is something that should be overcome in order to live a God-pleasing life. The human body and its physical and sexual dimensions appear to obstruct a pure union with the divine realm. The body, with its desires, is perishable and unreliable material, and therefore the soul has to be separated from the body in order to remain steadily focused on salvation. It can be said that Christian theology is heavily defined by a body and mind dualism, while it has never surrendered itself to a complete divorce of body and spirit due to the belief that redemption and sanctification always include both spirit and body. Ambiguity seems to be the key notion when it comes to Christian faith and the human body (see Tripp 1997:131-152; Isherwood & Stuart 1998:9-13). Body theology is one of the discourses where this deep ambiguous approach to the body is addressed. The general aim of body theology is to value the meaning of the human body, and the female body in particular. In the various approaches of body theology, the human body is not only understood in a literal sense, but also in a symbolical sense: the body is a living organic entity that has the capacity to make things tangible. The body represents those things that usually remain under the surface, such as power relations, desires, identity, relations and well-being. One 56. The relationship between creation and physicality found its way to the center of theological discourse, as a result of topics such as ecology, environment, gender, justice, globalization and physical science that stimulated the debate about the relation of empirical reality and faith (and about the development of a theology of nature). 246

could say that people’s bodies make concrete the obscured or intangible essentials of life. This means that the corporeal human being (including the mind or spirit) is the only domain where the human experience is received, saved and transformed in personal and communal expressions. The body in its materiality is the site of all human experience. Theological perceptions of the embodiment of human experiences, then, imply that the body has become the lens through which the relation between God and creation can be viewed. James Nelson (1992), one of the initiators of body theology, even contends that the body is the foundational source of theological knowledge, in as much as the body constitutes the locus of communication between God and creation. Based on the presupposition that “we do not just have bodies; we are bodies” (Nelson 1992:43), the body receives a major emphasis in the relation between the God who became body Himself, and the human being who is created out of dust. The body can thus be seen as a crucial factor in the relationship between God and creation, because the focus on the body suggests not only that every experience to the human body can be related to God, but also that the physicality of human life is the basis for speaking about God. The body is the physical frame of the relationship between God and human life, and it provides the grammar for God-talk and for the self-understanding of human beings. In their major work Philosophy in the Flesh, Lakoff & Johnson (1999:564-566) contend that any spiritual experience is embodied. They reject the idea that the body is a mere vessel for a disembodied mind, and they emphasize the close relatedness between our conceptual systems and the commonalities of our bodies and of the environments we live in (Lakoff & Johnson 1999:6). In understanding that the human body can be considered the foundational source of theological knowledge, and particularly the locus of communication between God and creation, consequently means that the vulnerable body is also involved in God-talk. The vulnerable materiality of human life, the body as a site of experiences of illness, and the deep physical longing for healing, are all contributing factors that provide the lens through which theological knowledge is explored. When the vulnerable body is perceived as a source of articulations about God as well as about the identity of the human being in relation to God, then theological reflection on the link between God and health follows a different track compared to predominant ideas about health as a condition of strong and fit bodies. Theology that allows the vulnerable body to be its lens, does not want to start in the domain of dominant doctrines and ecclesial preferences, but breaks new ground by asking how the vulnerable, sick and oppressed body should be related to its Creator. 247

materiality 56 . The relation between God <strong>and</strong> <strong>the</strong> world <strong>in</strong>volves materiality, ‘<strong>the</strong> dust <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong><br />

ground’. In o<strong>the</strong>r words, <strong>the</strong> physicality <strong>of</strong> creation is <strong>the</strong> only site where <strong>the</strong> Spirit can present<br />

God’s love for <strong>the</strong> world.<br />

Bodies <strong>and</strong> o<strong>the</strong>r tangible forms <strong>of</strong> life are <strong>in</strong>dispensable manifestations <strong>of</strong> God’s grace <strong>and</strong><br />

commitment to <strong>the</strong> world. They are needed <strong>in</strong> order to underst<strong>and</strong> <strong>and</strong> experience <strong>the</strong> quality <strong>of</strong><br />

God-given life. These quality-bearers embody <strong>the</strong> cont<strong>in</strong>gency <strong>of</strong> creation: our bodies reveal our<br />

dependence (s<strong>in</strong>ce we do not own <strong>the</strong> breath <strong>of</strong> life) <strong>and</strong> <strong>the</strong>y represent <strong>the</strong> non-necessity <strong>of</strong><br />

human life. The orderl<strong>in</strong>ess <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> body can be disrupted, an illness can occur, <strong>and</strong> death can<br />

come at any time. In reveal<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> cont<strong>in</strong>gency <strong>of</strong> human life, bodies represent <strong>the</strong> vulnerability<br />

<strong>of</strong> creation.<br />

In relation to <strong>the</strong> cont<strong>in</strong>gency <strong>of</strong> creation, Christian <strong>the</strong>ology <strong>in</strong> general has developed an<br />

ambiguous relationship with physicality. On <strong>the</strong> one h<strong>and</strong>, Christianity can be seen as a body<br />

religion par excellence, consider<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> crucial mean<strong>in</strong>g <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>in</strong>carnation <strong>of</strong> God <strong>and</strong> <strong>of</strong><br />

Christ’s body that carried away <strong>the</strong> s<strong>in</strong> <strong>of</strong> mank<strong>in</strong>d. On <strong>the</strong> o<strong>the</strong>r h<strong>and</strong>, Christianity is familiar<br />

with <strong>the</strong> idea that <strong>the</strong> body is someth<strong>in</strong>g that should be overcome <strong>in</strong> order to live a God-pleas<strong>in</strong>g<br />

life. The human body <strong>and</strong> its physical <strong>and</strong> sexual dimensions appear to obstruct a pure union<br />

with <strong>the</strong> div<strong>in</strong>e realm. The body, with its desires, is perishable <strong>and</strong> unreliable material, <strong>and</strong><br />

<strong>the</strong>refore <strong>the</strong> soul has to be separated from <strong>the</strong> body <strong>in</strong> order to rema<strong>in</strong> steadily focused on<br />

salvation. It can be said that Christian <strong>the</strong>ology is heavily def<strong>in</strong>ed by a body <strong>and</strong> m<strong>in</strong>d dualism,<br />

while it has never surrendered itself to a complete divorce <strong>of</strong> body <strong>and</strong> <strong>spirit</strong> due to <strong>the</strong> belief<br />

that redemption <strong>and</strong> sanctification always <strong>in</strong>clude both <strong>spirit</strong> <strong>and</strong> body. Ambiguity seems to be<br />

<strong>the</strong> key notion when it comes to Christian faith <strong>and</strong> <strong>the</strong> human body (see Tripp 1997:131-152;<br />

Isherwood & Stuart 1998:9-13).<br />

Body <strong>the</strong>ology is one <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> discourses where this deep ambiguous approach to <strong>the</strong> body is<br />

addressed. The general aim <strong>of</strong> body <strong>the</strong>ology is to value <strong>the</strong> mean<strong>in</strong>g <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> human body, <strong>and</strong> <strong>the</strong><br />

female body <strong>in</strong> particular. In <strong>the</strong> various approaches <strong>of</strong> body <strong>the</strong>ology, <strong>the</strong> human body is not<br />

only understood <strong>in</strong> a literal sense, but also <strong>in</strong> a symbolical sense: <strong>the</strong> body is a liv<strong>in</strong>g organic<br />

entity that has <strong>the</strong> capacity to make th<strong>in</strong>gs tangible. The body represents those th<strong>in</strong>gs that usually<br />

rema<strong>in</strong> under <strong>the</strong> surface, such as power relations, desires, identity, relations <strong>and</strong> well-be<strong>in</strong>g. One<br />

56. The relationship between creation <strong>and</strong> physicality found its way to <strong>the</strong> center <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong>ological discourse, as a result<br />

<strong>of</strong> topics such as ecology, environment, gender, justice, globalization <strong>and</strong> physical science that stimulated <strong>the</strong> debate<br />

about <strong>the</strong> relation <strong>of</strong> empirical reality <strong>and</strong> faith (<strong>and</strong> about <strong>the</strong> development <strong>of</strong> a <strong>the</strong>ology <strong>of</strong> nature).<br />

246

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!