Course Correction Gone Awry--Part 2
I have heard, and mostly believe what I've heard, about bondage that can affect successive generations when a person chooses to give room to Satan in his loyalties and commitments. I'm not sure exactly how this works, since God obviously shows abundant mercy to all who turn to him. It's clear to me, as well, that individual choices can free a person from any bondage that might otherwise be present. I'll leave it to others to sort out the finer points of how this works. What I want to think about here first is the kind of ancestral influence that feels more like a finger in your back than a vise on your heart.
I'm old enough to know five generations of some families. True, the youngest generation is still quite young, and the oldest one I've known is long gone. I know some things about some of these families that spring to mind in a flash when I see yet another family member behaving and/ or choosing exactly as an ancestor, sibling, cousin, aunt, or uncle would have done. I don't see an individual action or attitude only. I see the weight of multiple generations in that action or attitude. Sometimes this way of seeing is a really annoying inconvenience. I don't like the sense that open-mindedness is being squelched by stereotyping. I'm sure I often miss many nuanced differences that are present. Yet, observing such patterns can be instructive. Specifically, it can prompt me to examine my own tendencies and search through what I know of my family history to see what links are revealed by the search.
Consider an imaginary character from the past whom I'll call Benedict. His daughter is ill, and Benedict wants to call the local "Braucher" (German word: pow-wow person) for help. Benedict's wife, however, will have none of it. She insists on taking the child to a medical doctor. The doctor treats the child, but the child dies very soon (I'm imagining out-of-control, undiagnosed diabetes here). Benedict is sure his daughter's death is the doctor's fault, (making it his wife's fault is too unthinkable) and, since he is a decisive man, he promptly resolves never again to trust a medical doctor with a health matter. His wife's wishes are a problem, however, since he cannot hope to live peaceably with her if he continues to consult a Braucher. He finds a reasonable compromise in learning all he can about products that have healing properties and can be found in nature, and he stocks his medicine cabinet with whatever is reputed to have healing qualities. Benedict's wife and family very rarely see a doctor, and then only over Benedict's protests. The children regularly are made to swallow foul-tasting potions from Dad's medicine cabinet, but protest is not allowed.
Benedict's other children grow up with memories of the grief caused by their sister's death. They also know something of the underlying conflicts between their parents, and they've learned that brauching is associated with dark powers they want no part of. The bad taste of Dad's medicine still lingers. How will they deal with their own health challenges?
Picture another imaginary family with a young son who is sick with a respiratory ailment. Noah is the father and Enos is the son. Noah and his wife Fannie would like to take Enos to the doctor, but, ringing in their ears is the criticism they heard the last time they took a sick child to the doctor. "Such foolishness. Always running to the doctor about every little thing," they heard. So Noah and Fannie put mustard plasters on Enos' chest and stay home, and Enos dies of pneumonia. Noah and Fannie are sure that if it hadn't been for trying to please their critics, Enos would still be with them. They resolve to follow their own wishes in the future if a similar situation ever arises. No one will ever again keep these parents from seeking medical help whenever it's needed.
All sorts of variations on the above themes are possible. The original parental preference might stay intact for multiple generations--long after the situation that prompted the preference is forgotten--out of fear that deviation will bring condemnation and tragedy. On the other hand, descendants might choose to boldly depart from their parents' "errors," and blaze a "righteous" trail. The point is that when any given outcome takes place, especially a tragic one, unless the adults respond with humility, acceptance, moderation, and faith, the children in the family will almost certainly pick up and carry a great deal of baggage into their own future. That finger in their back will stab purposefully, and make walking straight a hard thing, no matter if the now-grown children choose to consult the braucher, gather and partake of herbs, or turn purposefully and promptly to a medical practitioner. Only one way of peace is possible, and that way may or may not involve any of the above approaches--except the brauching one. That one should be resisted. It will never bring peace.
Missing from each of the above scenarios is reference to a deep and abiding conviction that God is the healer, and, apart from Him, no healing ever occurs. Because of this exclusivity on God's part, no other particular approach can be assumed to always be the right one. In the face of illness or injury, the right approach in the beginning is always a consultation with the Heavenly Father--eyes wide open and on the run, if need be.
I've witnessed a number of passionate discussions on the general topic of health and wellness. Often they have taken the form of pitting traditional medical approaches (think pharmaceutical) against alternative approaches (think natural). In my circle of acquaintances, lately, much more has been made of a third approach: supernatural healing. Individuals and families often seem to bend strongly toward one approach, and disdain all others In my view, most of the discussions and many of the practices lack articulation or demonstration of any satisfying, cohesive, balanced truth encompassing all of the above. People who seem to practice a balanced approach aren't talking much in my hearing.
Rightly or wrongly, I've come to believe that ancestral actions and reactions, and their tendency to affect those who live now comprise one of at least two significant interferences with sensible thinking on the matter. In its least damaging iterations, the interference takes the form of cautious preferences and a gimlet eye toward non-preferred options. More damaging approaches add obsession, bombast, finger-wagging, and villain-hunting to the mix.
At one end of the interference spectrum, I think I see spiritual bondage encroaching very far into physical matters. If spiritual bondage is present, it likely comes from unrepented-of sins--like anger, bitterness, pride, and selfishness. As these root deeply and grow more entrenched in a single person’s heart, the resulting outlook on life will spread to others in the household, unless they exercise extraordinary vigilance and discernment and turn to God for a changed heart.
Benedict’s children will likely absorb the anger, bitterness, pride, and selfishness Benedict felt after his daughter’s death, especially regarding medical/alternative/superstitious approaches to health matters. The wrong attitudes can survive, even if the grown children never swallow another natural potion or call on a braucher–or perhaps especially if they do these things. The point is that the choices Benedict’s descendants make regarding health matters may be based far more on what was in Benedict’s heart than what was in his medicine cabinet, and the descendants likely will never recognize the source of their own biases.
Involvement with the braucher and his associated dark powers may be recognized as a problem, and deliverance from such influence may be deliberately sought, but the other causes and effects are far more insidious, and far less likely to be recognized. The necessity of repentance and the need for deliverance from these “quiet sins” have no exciting and imagination-catching powers–as does Spiritual Warfare. Meanwhile, the finger-in-the-back kind of ancestral prodding can slowly morph, in each generation, into a vise on the heart, and the next generations “inherit” an ever more toxic ancestral soup of biases. Noah and Fannie’s influence, while more “respectable” on the surface than Benedict’s, may cause just as much damage in transition as Benedict’s.
Whatever the cause, if the problem is spiritual bondage, God is the answer--not more evidence, more solid science, better doctors, more novel alternatives, more gifted healers, or any position held more firmly than ever. Humbly acknowledging great need is necessary--not a triumphant pronouncement of having discovered yet another "magic bullet" or having added one more anchor to a ship already aground.
I'm old enough to know five generations of some families. True, the youngest generation is still quite young, and the oldest one I've known is long gone. I know some things about some of these families that spring to mind in a flash when I see yet another family member behaving and/ or choosing exactly as an ancestor, sibling, cousin, aunt, or uncle would have done. I don't see an individual action or attitude only. I see the weight of multiple generations in that action or attitude. Sometimes this way of seeing is a really annoying inconvenience. I don't like the sense that open-mindedness is being squelched by stereotyping. I'm sure I often miss many nuanced differences that are present. Yet, observing such patterns can be instructive. Specifically, it can prompt me to examine my own tendencies and search through what I know of my family history to see what links are revealed by the search.
Consider an imaginary character from the past whom I'll call Benedict. His daughter is ill, and Benedict wants to call the local "Braucher" (German word: pow-wow person) for help. Benedict's wife, however, will have none of it. She insists on taking the child to a medical doctor. The doctor treats the child, but the child dies very soon (I'm imagining out-of-control, undiagnosed diabetes here). Benedict is sure his daughter's death is the doctor's fault, (making it his wife's fault is too unthinkable) and, since he is a decisive man, he promptly resolves never again to trust a medical doctor with a health matter. His wife's wishes are a problem, however, since he cannot hope to live peaceably with her if he continues to consult a Braucher. He finds a reasonable compromise in learning all he can about products that have healing properties and can be found in nature, and he stocks his medicine cabinet with whatever is reputed to have healing qualities. Benedict's wife and family very rarely see a doctor, and then only over Benedict's protests. The children regularly are made to swallow foul-tasting potions from Dad's medicine cabinet, but protest is not allowed.
Benedict's other children grow up with memories of the grief caused by their sister's death. They also know something of the underlying conflicts between their parents, and they've learned that brauching is associated with dark powers they want no part of. The bad taste of Dad's medicine still lingers. How will they deal with their own health challenges?
Picture another imaginary family with a young son who is sick with a respiratory ailment. Noah is the father and Enos is the son. Noah and his wife Fannie would like to take Enos to the doctor, but, ringing in their ears is the criticism they heard the last time they took a sick child to the doctor. "Such foolishness. Always running to the doctor about every little thing," they heard. So Noah and Fannie put mustard plasters on Enos' chest and stay home, and Enos dies of pneumonia. Noah and Fannie are sure that if it hadn't been for trying to please their critics, Enos would still be with them. They resolve to follow their own wishes in the future if a similar situation ever arises. No one will ever again keep these parents from seeking medical help whenever it's needed.
All sorts of variations on the above themes are possible. The original parental preference might stay intact for multiple generations--long after the situation that prompted the preference is forgotten--out of fear that deviation will bring condemnation and tragedy. On the other hand, descendants might choose to boldly depart from their parents' "errors," and blaze a "righteous" trail. The point is that when any given outcome takes place, especially a tragic one, unless the adults respond with humility, acceptance, moderation, and faith, the children in the family will almost certainly pick up and carry a great deal of baggage into their own future. That finger in their back will stab purposefully, and make walking straight a hard thing, no matter if the now-grown children choose to consult the braucher, gather and partake of herbs, or turn purposefully and promptly to a medical practitioner. Only one way of peace is possible, and that way may or may not involve any of the above approaches--except the brauching one. That one should be resisted. It will never bring peace.
Missing from each of the above scenarios is reference to a deep and abiding conviction that God is the healer, and, apart from Him, no healing ever occurs. Because of this exclusivity on God's part, no other particular approach can be assumed to always be the right one. In the face of illness or injury, the right approach in the beginning is always a consultation with the Heavenly Father--eyes wide open and on the run, if need be.
I've witnessed a number of passionate discussions on the general topic of health and wellness. Often they have taken the form of pitting traditional medical approaches (think pharmaceutical) against alternative approaches (think natural). In my circle of acquaintances, lately, much more has been made of a third approach: supernatural healing. Individuals and families often seem to bend strongly toward one approach, and disdain all others In my view, most of the discussions and many of the practices lack articulation or demonstration of any satisfying, cohesive, balanced truth encompassing all of the above. People who seem to practice a balanced approach aren't talking much in my hearing.
Rightly or wrongly, I've come to believe that ancestral actions and reactions, and their tendency to affect those who live now comprise one of at least two significant interferences with sensible thinking on the matter. In its least damaging iterations, the interference takes the form of cautious preferences and a gimlet eye toward non-preferred options. More damaging approaches add obsession, bombast, finger-wagging, and villain-hunting to the mix.
At one end of the interference spectrum, I think I see spiritual bondage encroaching very far into physical matters. If spiritual bondage is present, it likely comes from unrepented-of sins--like anger, bitterness, pride, and selfishness. As these root deeply and grow more entrenched in a single person’s heart, the resulting outlook on life will spread to others in the household, unless they exercise extraordinary vigilance and discernment and turn to God for a changed heart.
Benedict’s children will likely absorb the anger, bitterness, pride, and selfishness Benedict felt after his daughter’s death, especially regarding medical/alternative/superstitious approaches to health matters. The wrong attitudes can survive, even if the grown children never swallow another natural potion or call on a braucher–or perhaps especially if they do these things. The point is that the choices Benedict’s descendants make regarding health matters may be based far more on what was in Benedict’s heart than what was in his medicine cabinet, and the descendants likely will never recognize the source of their own biases.
Involvement with the braucher and his associated dark powers may be recognized as a problem, and deliverance from such influence may be deliberately sought, but the other causes and effects are far more insidious, and far less likely to be recognized. The necessity of repentance and the need for deliverance from these “quiet sins” have no exciting and imagination-catching powers–as does Spiritual Warfare. Meanwhile, the finger-in-the-back kind of ancestral prodding can slowly morph, in each generation, into a vise on the heart, and the next generations “inherit” an ever more toxic ancestral soup of biases. Noah and Fannie’s influence, while more “respectable” on the surface than Benedict’s, may cause just as much damage in transition as Benedict’s.
Whatever the cause, if the problem is spiritual bondage, God is the answer--not more evidence, more solid science, better doctors, more novel alternatives, more gifted healers, or any position held more firmly than ever. Humbly acknowledging great need is necessary--not a triumphant pronouncement of having discovered yet another "magic bullet" or having added one more anchor to a ship already aground.
posted by Mrs. I (Miriam Iwashige) at
4:23 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home