David Anguish
Some years ago, a friend and I were discussing the work of some medical missionaries when he expressed a concern. Understand, this was not a man who was isolated from mission work. He had worked in and directed several stateside campaigns. He had also traveled extensively outside the U.S. on trips comparable to the missionary journeys described in Acts. He had read extensively on missions, and had presented summaries of his learning - both academic and experiential - in both oral and written forms.
His concern arose from this vast experience. He did not agree with those who think it improper for church funds to be used to respond to the physical needs of starving, neglected or malnourished people. But he did fear that the good work would stop there. He was concerned that those involved in medical missions would feel so good about the good they did that they would never get around to sharing the ultimate good, the gospel's good news.
What concerned my friend about foreign work ought to concern us about our work closer to home. It is easy to get so caught up in the hundred and one good things which need to be done that we never go beyond those things to address the needs which outlast this world.
But let's understand that what we need is balance. We do not agree with those who have erected a wall between the physical and spiritual and thus would condemn any who reach out to meet the many physical, emotional and psychological needs people have. Those who make such distinctions show that they understand neither themselves nor Scripture.
Think about the nature of a man. Hebrew thought, with its understanding of the term "body" as the basic equivalent for the "self", had it right in seeing man as an integrated whole, not a being to be divided into discrete parts. We affirm this in light of what we experience. How emotionally and intellectually fit are you when battling a case of the flu? How realistic is a school teacher who expects the best intellectual effort on a test from a girl whose boyfriend has broken off their steady relationship between classes at her locker? If our various "parts" do not integrally affect each other, how do you account for the angry emotional response when you can't understand what your software manual is explaining so "clearly", a response by the way which is known to trigger biochemical reactions within your body which can adversely affect your physical health?
Furthermore, if man is really the divided being some have made him out to be, how does one explain the gospels' account of Jesus? In his sermon to Cornelius, Peter summarized Jesus' ministry this way: "You know of Jesus of Nazareth, how God anointed Him with the Holy Spirit and with power, and how He went about doing good and healing all who were oppressed by the devil, for God was with Him" (Acts 10:38, NASB). The gospels amplify Peter's review. As Jesus healed the sick, exorcised demons, and fed the hungry, he did not always pause for a lengthy discussion of "spiritual things". We doubt that he would have had the time to do so on occasions like that described in Mark 1:32 where we read that "they began bringing to Him all who were ill and those who were demon-possessed."
We submit that, if Jesus' view of what it means to be spiritual and to engage in ministry had matched that of those who want to strictly divide the spiritual from the physical, the story of the gospels would look very different from what it does. Either the gospel writers got it wrong, or ministry is to address broader concerns than some would have us believe. We'll leave it to you to decide which is more reasonable.