Reverence, Responsibility and the Meaning of Health
Ashley Moyse, Ph.D., Research Associate, Vancouver School of Theology/ Trinity College, University of Divinity
Die Ehrfurcht vor dem Leben [The reverence for life] (see Barth) must be that which compels us to act. However, such life necessarily involves subsequent imperatives. That is, if we will and affirm life, we must also will to satisfy certain biological requirements and the practice of health, among other concerns. Indeed, it seems appropriate that if we will life, certain biopsychological demands must also be satisfied. As the Swiss theologian Karl Barth has alluded, these impulsive demands are “terribly energetic and often so noticeable” over against other spheres of the lived experience. Accordingly, these demands, including hunger, thirst, fatigue, and libido, must not only be respected, thus lived and not denied, but also surveyed, controlled, and guided towards a flourished state; a freedom between abusus in defectu and abusus in excess [abuse of deficiency and abuse of excess]. Such needs are requirements of the lived human life, and therefore must be lived by human beings, neither to be surrendered to nor oppressed by a greed for excess or a fear of the same. Instead, the stewarding of the impulsive demands contributes well to the capability, vigor, and freedom, and so the health, for human life.
So, if we are to will and affirm life, we must also will to be healthy. For Barth, this imperative is essential in one is to revere, or respect, human life. But what does 'health' mean? A philosophy of health, or more appropriately a theology of health, might be able to compel further reflection on this question while challenging the panoply of interpretations of health in contemporary dialogue. Accordingly, this paper will explore the central theme of Karl Barth's interpretation of health, which is grounded by his anthropology while challenging us to understand life, and therefore health and sickness, as a shared event of human encounter and responsibility.
Die Ehrfurcht vor dem Leben [The reverence for life] (see Barth) must be that which compels us to act. However, such life necessarily involves subsequent imperatives. That is, if we will and affirm life, we must also will to satisfy certain biological requirements and the practice of health, among other concerns. Indeed, it seems appropriate that if we will life, certain biopsychological demands must also be satisfied. As the Swiss theologian Karl Barth has alluded, these impulsive demands are “terribly energetic and often so noticeable” over against other spheres of the lived experience. Accordingly, these demands, including hunger, thirst, fatigue, and libido, must not only be respected, thus lived and not denied, but also surveyed, controlled, and guided towards a flourished state; a freedom between abusus in defectu and abusus in excess [abuse of deficiency and abuse of excess]. Such needs are requirements of the lived human life, and therefore must be lived by human beings, neither to be surrendered to nor oppressed by a greed for excess or a fear of the same. Instead, the stewarding of the impulsive demands contributes well to the capability, vigor, and freedom, and so the health, for human life.
So, if we are to will and affirm life, we must also will to be healthy. For Barth, this imperative is essential in one is to revere, or respect, human life. But what does 'health' mean? A philosophy of health, or more appropriately a theology of health, might be able to compel further reflection on this question while challenging the panoply of interpretations of health in contemporary dialogue. Accordingly, this paper will explore the central theme of Karl Barth's interpretation of health, which is grounded by his anthropology while challenging us to understand life, and therefore health and sickness, as a shared event of human encounter and responsibility.