The Treatment of Sin
Jaime Konerman-Sease, BA in Theology, Graduate Assistant, St. Louis University
Medical language impacts the church’s language, as well as the church’s practice. Medical treatment of disease through either aggressive treatment (biopsychosocialspiritual medicine) or palliative care has informed the way the church responds to sin in the world and individuals. The church, as the body of Christ, should embrace a palliative care approach rather than an aggressive treatment of sin. Unfortunately, the church often defaults to an aggressive treatment of sin, which isolates and exiles individuals from the church community.
In the United States, medicine has great influence over culture and thus over the church. As a teaching tool, church leaders even use disease as an allegory for the concept of sin. Often these church leaders interpret physical sickness and disease found in scripture to denote sin in personal life.
Western medicine has two approaches to disease: the patient can be treated in hope that the disease will be eliminated through biopsychosocialspiritual medicine, or they can enter palliative care where suffering will be eased and the other needs of the patient cared for. Because medicine has so much influence over language and practice in the church, the church often makes similar decisions in the treatment of the unwanted. Statistics for referrals of terminal patients to hospice care show it is clear that the medical community is more likely to try repeated aggressive treatments than palliative care. The church, influenced by this practice, has begun to treat sin in a similar tyrannical way.
The story of Christ also greatly shapes the practice of the church. Christ entered the world to abolish sin and death, so that all may be united with God. Here, sin is not bad actions, but overall separation from God. The basis for Christian hope is that Christ has abolished sin. The work of the church is to enact Christ’s salvation to the world, offering all the freedom from sin.
Biopsychosocialspiritual medicine is tyrannical as an aggressive treatment and oversteps its bounds in hoping that the cure of disease will cure the entire person. When the church embraces this model they forget that Christ has done the healing work and they attempt to cure the entire person without love for their individuality. This fails to love the entirety of the individual as God created. Thus the person who is suffering from sin is left isolated from the church community. The church does not do the work of abolishing sins; rather they share the message that Christ offers liberation. In this way, the church embraces the medical concept of palliative care. This care is not passive and does not submit to death, but actively cares for the individual in suffering. The work of the church, then, must be concerned with caring for those who are suffering, the poor, the marginalized, and the abused. When the church enters into this work, this palliative care, their love for the individual in front of them opens the way for Christ’s freeing act of salvation.
Medical language impacts the church’s language, as well as the church’s practice. Medical treatment of disease through either aggressive treatment (biopsychosocialspiritual medicine) or palliative care has informed the way the church responds to sin in the world and individuals. The church, as the body of Christ, should embrace a palliative care approach rather than an aggressive treatment of sin. Unfortunately, the church often defaults to an aggressive treatment of sin, which isolates and exiles individuals from the church community.
In the United States, medicine has great influence over culture and thus over the church. As a teaching tool, church leaders even use disease as an allegory for the concept of sin. Often these church leaders interpret physical sickness and disease found in scripture to denote sin in personal life.
Western medicine has two approaches to disease: the patient can be treated in hope that the disease will be eliminated through biopsychosocialspiritual medicine, or they can enter palliative care where suffering will be eased and the other needs of the patient cared for. Because medicine has so much influence over language and practice in the church, the church often makes similar decisions in the treatment of the unwanted. Statistics for referrals of terminal patients to hospice care show it is clear that the medical community is more likely to try repeated aggressive treatments than palliative care. The church, influenced by this practice, has begun to treat sin in a similar tyrannical way.
The story of Christ also greatly shapes the practice of the church. Christ entered the world to abolish sin and death, so that all may be united with God. Here, sin is not bad actions, but overall separation from God. The basis for Christian hope is that Christ has abolished sin. The work of the church is to enact Christ’s salvation to the world, offering all the freedom from sin.
Biopsychosocialspiritual medicine is tyrannical as an aggressive treatment and oversteps its bounds in hoping that the cure of disease will cure the entire person. When the church embraces this model they forget that Christ has done the healing work and they attempt to cure the entire person without love for their individuality. This fails to love the entirety of the individual as God created. Thus the person who is suffering from sin is left isolated from the church community. The church does not do the work of abolishing sins; rather they share the message that Christ offers liberation. In this way, the church embraces the medical concept of palliative care. This care is not passive and does not submit to death, but actively cares for the individual in suffering. The work of the church, then, must be concerned with caring for those who are suffering, the poor, the marginalized, and the abused. When the church enters into this work, this palliative care, their love for the individual in front of them opens the way for Christ’s freeing act of salvation.