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
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
- Page 195 and 196: pattern of the confession — is cl
- Page 197 and 198: salvation). Questions/answers 65-82
- Page 199 and 200: (Shults 2008:271-287). The understa
- Page 201 and 202: heart. Calvin in particular was ver
- Page 203 and 204: the transformation of the believer
- Page 205 and 206: and as such dependent on God who ha
- Page 207 and 208: that healing is located outside the
- Page 209 and 210: Hollingsworth 2008). The broad conc
- Page 211 and 212: not be disappointed: God’s love w
- Page 213 and 214: justice, liberation and the affirma
- Page 215 and 216: elationships among the Trinitarian
- Page 217 and 218: constitute an important element of
- Page 219 and 220: lost. She was caught in a vicious c
- Page 221 and 222: CHAPTER 8. THE SPIRIT AND TRANSFORM
- Page 223 and 224: system of the Christian church (…
- Page 225 and 226: 8.2.3 Spirit of adoption James Dunn
- Page 227 and 228: 8.2.4 Physicality and transformatio
- Page 229 and 230: Metaphorical language about transfo
- Page 231 and 232: Reformed thought on the theme of tr
- Page 233 and 234: that God’s plan of salvation tran
- Page 235 and 236: gift into a gift that is beneficial
- Page 237 and 238: considered a tentative condition in
- Page 239 and 240: CHAPTER 9. THE SPIRIT AND QUALITY O
- Page 241 and 242: physical abilities, social circumst
- Page 243 and 244: The clear distinction between the C
- Page 245: Conradie 54 shows, based on Van Rul
- Page 249 and 250: 9.3.1 Vulnerability, creation and S
- Page 251 and 252: in the cosmos, Polkinghorne (2006:1
- Page 253 and 254: ody, and thus his or her vulnerabil
- Page 255 and 256: the Holy Spirit. Moreover, this foc
- Page 257 and 258: The acceptance of her vulnerability
- Page 259 and 260: CHAPTER 10. THE SPIRIT AND POWER Th
- Page 261 and 262: oom for creation and for the embodi
- Page 263 and 264: Migliore (2008) has the same opinio
- Page 265 and 266: 10.2 POWER AND THE HOLY SPIRIT Chri
- Page 267 and 268: which the Spirit of God brings new
- Page 269 and 270: life through this discontinuity:
- Page 271 and 272: interpersonal relations. Everyone s
- Page 273 and 274: God’s power is revealed through h
- Page 275 and 276: The journey consists of two main st
- Page 277 and 278: are a constructive part of it. In a
- Page 279 and 280: transformation can be defined as he
- Page 281 and 282: provided the basis for a re-visioni
- Page 283 and 284: iomedical constructions of health,
- Page 285 and 286: Attanasi, K 2008. Getting in Step w
- Page 287 and 288: — 1997. Theology of the Old Testa
- Page 289 and 290: — 2001. ‘Naming the Spirit: Tow
- Page 291 and 292: Paper for use in HIV and AIDS Progr
- Page 293 and 294: Hamilton, NQ 1957. The Holy Spirit
- Page 295 and 296: — 2007. The Next Christendom. The
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