The power to heal and apostolic succession

[kelvinf]

Jesus of Nazareth gave authority to his disciples to preach the Good News, baptize, forgive sins, perform miracles and to heal the sick.

Based on the concept of apostolic succession, all priests today should have inherited all those powers. However, that to perform miracles and to heal the sick seems to be missing.

To be fair enough, Mark actually used the word believers (Mark 16:17-18). Meaning not just priests but all believers (all of us).

In fact, in the Acts of the Apostles, we see the disciples making use of those powers.
Protestants actually question the authority of priests to forgive sins when they can’t perform miracles. One could say that the two are not related as such. Moreover Jesus of Nazareth asked the Pharisees (Lk 5:23):

Which is easier, to say, ‘Your sins are forgiven,’ or to say, ‘Rise and walk’?

So I understand it is easier to forgive sins, baptize than to perform miracles or speak in strange tongues.

But based on the concept of apostolic succession (if I understand it well), why are some of those powers missing today? Where did they go to and what are the possible explanations?

 

[CMBlaise]

So, if I understand correctly, your issue is that you understand apostolic succession as conferring all the miraculous powers of the apostles onto all priests and bishops, and these seem to be present today?

I totally understand your sentiment. Our world does seem kind of mundane at times, but I think that’s because, as Catholics, we are intimately familiar with miracles. Consider, for one, that all of our priests, upon ordination, are in fact given the authority to perform miracles through the power of God. Isn’t the Eucharist a miracle? Aren’t Confession and Baptism miracles?

If you’re more confused about the apparent inability of priests to heal the sick at their will, I would suggest that this power doesn’t have anything to do with their office, but with the strength of their faith and the faith of the person who seeks healing. We still hear, all the time, miraculous stories of people being healed either after praying or feeling God’s intervention, or even through the intervention of candidates for sainthood.

Maybe the only reason the Acts seem so chock full of miracles is because the Spirit hadn’t yet been as fully dispersed among humanity as it is today. All the miracles were happening in the same place!

 

[Verbum]

Hi Kelvin,

Apostolic succession applies only to bishops and it refers to the infallibilty they enjoy when teaching with other bishops in communion with the pope.

All baptized Christians receive the Holy Spirit and he is active in them according to their faith and the needs of the world. The Holy Spirit’s actions were more visible in the first years of the Church, so as to give the Church a boost, so to speak, but the manifestations of the Spirit are still with us, as Christians continue the work of Christ throughout the world.

Verbum

 

[budgie2]

Jesus of Nazareth gave authority to his disciples to preach the Good News, baptize, forgive sins, perform miracles and to heal the sick.

Based on the concept of apostolic succession, all priests today should have inherited all those powers. However, that to perform miracles and to heal the sick seems to be missing.

To be fair enough, Mark actually used the word believers (Mark 16:17-18). Meaning not just priests but all believers (all of us).

In fact, in the Acts of the Apostles, we see the disciples making use of those powers.
Protestants actually question the authority of priests to forgive sins when they can’t perform miracles. One could say that the two are not related as such. Moreover Jesus of Nazareth asked the Pharisees (Lk 5:23):

So I understand it is easier to forgive sins, baptize than to perform miracles or speak in strange tongues.

But based on the concept of apostolic succession (if I understand it well), why are some of those powers missing today? Where did they go to and what are the possible explanations?

The fact is that the Church have not fully converted to the word of God although we have some shrines to heal the sick such as Lourdes. The sacrament of the sick should be more widely available and could be offered in Confession or on a daily basis. The doctors in the West are basically witch doctors as they are involved in abortion and child sacrifice and we should have greater faith in divine healing and healing by sacrament. But the sacrament of the sick is currently not available to those with minor and non terminal illness.

 

[Sirach2]

I hope you have heard of Brother André Bessette, the miracle healer in Canada who was extremely devoted to St. Joseph. In fact, he will be canonized October 17th this fall. But I note that he was NOT a priest and never said mass or heard confessions. His biography is exceptionally beautiful! And strange to say, with all the thousands of healing miracles he wrought in St. Joseph’s name, he himself was always ill and weak in strength.

This subject of healing happens to be a very deep interest of mine, and like you OP, I have pondered some of the same questions you raise. Have you studied any writings of those who were given a powerful healing ministry? How about Sr. Briege McKenna? She too, was NOT a priest. Some of our noncatholic christians have written also, such as Agnes Sanford and Andrew Murray. I have to admit there are similarities of truth in all of these writings.

If ever a person was a participant in a healing, the joy and gratitude to God is overflowing. Maybe some day, we’ll see a greater outpouring of the Spirit’s gift as cancers and diseases resistant to medicines become more prevalent.

 

[Mark77]

"An evil and adulterous generation seeks for a sign, but no sign shall be given to it except the sign of Jonah." So he left them and departed. (MT 16:4)

"And he said to her, “Daughter, your faith has made you well; go in peace, and be healed of your disease.” (Mk 5:34)

**Faith is the secret, not “physical healings” although they occur today because of Faith!

Life is just a temporary condition, spiritual healings are eternal miracles!!
**

Sancta Maria, Mater Dei, Ora Pro Nobis Peccatoribus!

mark

 

[Chris0711]

The fact is that the Church have not fully converted to the word of God although we have some shrines to heal the sick such as Lourdes. The sacrament of the sick should be more widely available and could be offered in Confession or on a daily basis. The doctors in the West are basically witch doctors as they are involved in abortion and child sacrifice and we should have greater faith in divine healing and healing by sacrament. But the sacrament of the sick is currently not available to those with minor and non terminal illness.

I might be misunderstanding you but are you suggesting that we abandon medical aid in favor of divine healing based on as you say “doctors in the west” being “witch doctors”. I do hope that you are not applying this idea to the majority of doctors because I think you would find that is not at all the case.

Also are you proposing that the fact that the sacrament of the sick is “not available” is the reason that, as the OP said, there are apparently not as many miraculous works of healing.

I guess I am seeking clarification of your post.

 

[Sirach2]

Mark77:

Faith is the secret, not “physical healings” although they occur today because of Faith!

I felt just a touch of sadness when I read your post, and if I am understanding you correctly, it seems you discredit physical healings in favor of spiritual ones. You mentioned the verse about not seeking signs, but I believe you are taking it out of context in order to apply it to the Holy Spirit’s gift of healing.

It may be true that you haven’t studied the scriptures sufficiently to realize that Jesus desires the wholeness of the entire person: body, mind and spirit. To judge that He only heals the spirit because He wills man to suffer and cares little about his body, is to misunderstand Our Lord. Clearly, all through the gospels, we read that “He healed them ALL” - not some, or those who had sufficient faith, and even those who did not specifically ask to be healed - yes, ALL. And in the book of Acts, we find the same “mind of Christ” in St. Peter and the other apostles, whom scripture records, healed them ALL, and even the cripple at the gate who never asked for healing.

This is a wonderful gift, awesome in fact, and I would hope that God’s faithful servants would implore Him for empowerment to bring God’s compassionate healing to those who suffer.

 

[kelvinf]

Thanks for the answers. I will touch on most of the points mentioned above here.
Starting with apostolic succession. Ok, on one hand it seems to refer to the chain of Bishops:

Apostolic succession is the line of bishops stretching back to the apostles.

Source (2nd. paragraph)

On the other hand:

Apostolic ministry implies the authority to teach, to rule, and to sanctify, which has been handed down by the Apostles.

Source (last paragraph) (Note that, the article strives to connect confession with apostolic succession which is more or less similar to my link between healing and apostolic succession or in general, sacraments and apostolic succession → transfer of powers from the apostles.)

When talking of miracles, I am referring specifically to healing miracles and not those once in a while… (e.g a person surviving a ghastly accident)

If we say that healing requires faith from both parties (the healer and healee), what level of faith are we talking about? BTW, as already mentioned there were people healed in the bible who never asked to be healed. E.g. Acts 3:1-26

…
3
When he saw Peter and John about to go into the temple, he asked for alms.
4
But Peter looked intently at him, as did John, and said, “Look at us.”
5
He paid attention to them, expecting to receive something from them.
6
3 Peter said, “I have neither silver nor gold, but what I do have I give you: in the name of Jesus Christ the Nazorean, (rise and) walk.”
7
Then Peter took him by the right hand and raised him up, and immediately his feet and ankles grew strong.
8
He leaped up, stood, and walked around, and went into the temple with them, walking and jumping and praising God…

True, Peter mentioned further down that the man was healed through faith.
But could we say that all those who were healed in the bible had stronger faith than us today Or that all those who were healed by those healers mentioned by a poster above had stronger faith

Now back to my comparison (of Healing) with Baptism and Confession (or the sacraments in general). If healing requires that much faith then what about baptism and confession? Do they require less faith per se?
This comparison is very important because healing is the only “visible” (one knows and sees the effect) “sacrament” (“missing sacrament”).
Just as the church teaches that it is impossible to know whether one has done a perfect contrition, it might also be impossible to know whether one has actually been baptized or justified. Just as the formula of perfect contrition (act of contrition) does not guarantee perfect contrition; confession, baptismal vows and the provision of faith might not also guarantee justification, baptism or faith respectively.

Jesus of Nazareth gave authority to his disciples to forgive sins, preach the good news, heal and to baptize. If one of them is missing today, then one can fairly question the others. If to heal is very difficult, then we should not ignore the powers to forgive sins and baptize. They should even be more difficult than healing. Baptism frees us from original sin. It should require strong faith. Confession frees us from eternal damnation. This should also require strong faith. On the other hand, people can actually live with illness and diseases and still go to heaven but without baptism and confession,…
Hence the importance of this “visible missing sacrament of healing”. Note that the sacrament of the anointing of the sick (James 5:14-15) is far from being equivalent to the “missing sacrament of healing.” (Mark 16:18)

I am not looking for a sign but just trying to understand the Gospel and the teachings of the Catholic Church on this topic.

 

[Sirach2]

Just as the church teaches that it is impossible to know whether one has done a perfect contrition, it might also be impossible to know whether one has actually been baptized or justified.

The priest does in fact confer the sacrament through the grace of his ordination. His absolution is entirely valid. You may have forgotten that imperfect contrition in the heart of the penitent does not negate reception of absolution. He need not have “perfect” contrition, except at the moment of death if the sacrament of penance is unavailable to him and he is in mortal sin.

As for baptism, again - this is validly conferred by a priest whether faith is existent or not. Infants who receive this sacrament have no impediment. Even if a layperson would conditionally baptize someone at the moment of death, who exibits no cognisance of faith whatsoever, it can be valid.

I have to leave, but will try to comment on the rest of your post later.

 

[Sirach2]

But could we say that all those who were healed in the bible had stronger faith than us today? Or that all those who were healed by those healers mentioned by a poster above had stronger faith?

I am as puzzled as you are, Kevin, and have pondered and studied this quite extensively. There just seems to be a disbelief that God is able to use ordinary people [priests and/or laity] to effect a bodily healing for another person. It may be a problem stemming from reasoning that this gift was only needed to get the early church established, and is no longer needed.

In today’s gospel reading, Jesus told Philip, “He who sees Me, sees my Father.” And if that be true, what is the Father like? Is he compassionate? Does he care about suffering? Jesus did, so what are we to believe? If we had the trust of a little one and went to God in simplicity asking for a loaf, would he give us a stone? I do think there should be a greater evidence of healing than the scant witness seen in our era.

The Holy Spirit may be stirring some of us in the church to use this gift, which ought not to be seen as extraordinary, but the normal outpouring of God’s compassionate answer to prayer, especially the united prayer of a group of believers.

 

[Sirach2]

Kevin,

By way of a personal example, I will share this story separately. My neighbor had epilepsy and fell down a flight of stairs during a seizure. Her husband came to my home telling me that she was in the hospital, and asked me to pray.

As I sat and prayed near her bed, she was in a diaper, not knowing a soul, and really out of it. Suddenly she started exclaiming in her stupor over and over, “Lord Jesus help me, Lord Jesus, help me!!” It was really tearing at my spirit, but I began to reason, Jesus lives in me, what’s to stop him from healing her through me at this moment? I had never done this in my life, but as she kept repeating her unconscious prayer, I felt she was asking the Christ living within me to help her.

Finally, although I was greatly nervous, I issued the command to her, “In the name of Jesus Christ, be healed.” And then I left. The next day her husband brought her home, saying that suddenly she came to and all was well. Now I did not ask for the gift of healing, but God’s love for her brought us together to accomplish his will, even though she did not consciously ask for healing. We need to be hit over the head sometimes, and I marvel that it was so simple …

 

[kelvinf]

I hope you have heard of Brother André Bessette, the miracle healer in Canada who was extremely devoted to St. Joseph. In fact, he will be canonized October 17th this fall. But I note that he was NOT a priest and never said mass or heard confessions. His biography is exceptionally beautiful! And strange to say, with all the thousands of healing miracles he wrought in St. Joseph’s name, he himself was always ill and weak in strength.

This subject of healing happens to be a very deep interest of mine, and like you OP, I have pondered some of the same questions you raise. Have you studied any writings of those who were given a powerful healing ministry? How about Sr. Briege McKenna? She too, was NOT a priest. Some of our noncatholic christians have written also, such as Agnes Sanford and Andrew Murray. I have to admit there are similarities of truth in all of these writings.

If ever a person was a participant in a healing, the joy and gratitude to God is overflowing. Maybe some day, we’ll see a greater outpouring of the Spirit’s gift as cancers and diseases resistant to medicines become more prevalent.

Never heard of them but just read about them. Thanks. Actually there is an old thread about Sr. Briege Mckenna
Found this post interesting:

Originally Posted by Stephen-Maguire
Simply put if Jesus was in our town in the flesh like he was in the Holy land the multitudes would be running to meet Him.
He is with us in the Tabernacle, some believe it, some don’t.

 

[kelvinf]

The priest does in fact confer the sacrament through the grace of his ordination. His absolution is entirely valid. You may have forgotten that imperfect contrition in the heart of the penitent does not negate reception of absolution. He need not have “perfect” contrition, except at the moment of death if the sacrament of penance is unavailable to him and he is in mortal sin.

As for baptism, again - this is validly conferred by a priest whether faith is existent or not. Infants who receive this sacrament have no impediment. Even if a layperson would conditionally baptize someone at the moment of death, who exibits no cognisance of faith whatsoever, it can be valid.

I have to leave, but will try to comment on the rest of your post later.

What you have said is exactly what the Church teaches. As I mentioned above, Jesus of Nazareth gave these powers to the apostles. But there is no sacrament of healing as such. I am tending to think that if baptism and confession require little or no faith, then the same should apply to healing.

 

[kelvinf]

Kevin,

By way of a personal example, I will share this story separately. My neighbor had epilepsy and fell down a flight of stairs during a seizure. Her husband came to my home telling me that she was in the hospital, and asked me to pray.

As I sat and prayed near her bed, she was in a diaper, not knowing a soul, and really out of it. Suddenly she started exclaiming in her stupor over and over, “Lord Jesus help me, Lord Jesus, help me!!” It was really tearing at my spirit, but I began to reason, Jesus lives in me, what’s to stop him from healing her through me at this moment? I had never done this in my life, but as she kept repeating her unconscious prayer, I felt she was asking the Christ living within me to help her.

Finally, although I was greatly nervous, I issued the command to her, “In the name of Jesus Christ, be healed.” And then I left. The next day her husband brought her home, saying that suddenly she came to and all was well. Now I did not ask for the gift of healing, but God’s love for her brought us together to accomplish his will, even though she did not consciously ask for healing. We need to be hit over the head sometimes, and I marvel that it was so simple …

Wow. When I read the last paragraph, actually I was initially taken aback. If I were in your position, I am not sure it would have come to my mind to issue such a command.
In fact believers were also given the power to perform miracles as mentioned in the last chapter of Mark.

 

[inkaneer]

Maybe the answer as to why healings do not occur today with the frequency in earlier times is that faith today is not as it was in earlier times. But even then the disciples had their problems also. Read the passage in Matthew 17:14-21 where the disciples could not rebuke a demon and the reason Jesus gave. Also there maybe another reason that enters in here that no one has mentioned despite the witness of Pope JPII. In two words it is redemptive suffering. Purgation doesn’t have to wait till after death.

 

[Sirach2]

Kelvinf:

I am tending to think that if baptism and confession require little or no faith, then the same should apply to healing.

Well, I wouldn’t say that, because Jesus could heal very few in his home town because of their lack of faith. The gospels don’t say whether faith was present in all those he healed, especially when he healed them ALL in the crowds. We know that pharisees and those wishing to trap him were also in those crowds, so it could be that some of them were healed. We just don’t know. Nor do we know how deep their faith was. Possibly some who heard of his reputation had come out of curiosity to listen to him. Did they arrive at faith sufficient for healilng? Or did the total compassion of Jesus effect it without a deep measure of faith.

Here are some scriptures showing that he healed them ALL.
Mt. 8:16; Mt. 12:15; Mt. 14:14; Mt. 15:30; Mt. 19:2; Mt. 21:14; Lk. 4:40; Lk. 6:10;

A good example of Jesus’ compassion without an explicit act of faith, nor even a request for healing, was when Our Lord healed the ear of the soldier after Peter had cut it off. It always astounds me to think that soldiers saw a miracle on one of their own, yet proceeded to arrest him.

Another example of healing without a request, nor was faith evident in the scripture, is recorded in Mk. 3:1-5:

1 And he entered again into the synagogue, and there was a man there who had a withered hand. 2 And they watched him whether he would heal on the sabbath days; that they might accuse him. 3 And he said to the man who had the withered hand: Stand up in the midst. 4 And he saith to them: Is it lawful to do good on the sabbath days, or to do evil? to save life, or to destroy? But they held their peace. 5 And looking round about on them with anger, being grieved for the blindness of their hearts, he saith to the man: Stretch forth thy hand. And he stretched it forth: and his hand was restored unto him.

 

[Sirach2]

Kelvinf:

Wow. When I read the last paragraph, actually I was initially taken aback. If I were in your position, I am not sure it would have come to my mind to issue such a command.

You betchure booties I was scared, but what did I have to lose? How could I refuse to help her with such ardent pleadings in her unconscious state? As James 2:16 tells us, “And one of you say to them, ‘Go in peace, be warmed and filled’ yet you do not give them what is necessary for the body, what does it profit?”

I think God had the encounter with her all planned and moved me interiorly to respond to her urgent cries. Just think if I had been so afraid that I wouldn’t try???

 

[Sirach2]

Inkaneer:

Maybe the answer as to why healings do not occur today with the frequency in earlier times is that faith today is not as it was in earlier times. But even then the disciples had their problems also. Read the passage in Matthew 17:14-21 where the disciples could not rebuke a demon and the reason Jesus gave. Also there maybe another reason that enters in here that no one has mentioned despite the witness of Pope JPII. In two words it is redemptive suffering. Purgation doesn’t have to wait till after death.

I think casting out demons is a different issue than healing. But Our Lord’s words to them, as you know, were because they did not have sufficient faith. Maybe they faltered when results were not immediately manifest, as probably was customary for other encounters with demons. Rather than pray it through, they gave up.

And I agree completely with you that when God does not, for whatever reason, answer our prayers for healing, we may truly elevate our sufferings to him as being redemptive. That is the beautiful blessing of Jesus winning that victory for us through his passion and resurrection. Suffering need not be wasted or invaluable.

 

[Sirach2]

Hello again, Kelvinf,

As I thought about this thread, I remembered that you read about Sr. Briege McKenna in an old thread on the forum. In that thread, mention was made of her book “Miracles do Happen.” I do have the book, and I thought it would be good to share a very important thought that she brought out in her writing.

Although Sister Briege knew she was called to the ministry of healing, she always felt that it was necessary to go the person and lay hands on them, and she became concerned about the impossibility of doing that, due to time and travel restrictions - plus she had duties as a nun in her order.

Our Lord instructed her to pray over the telephone - yes, the telephone! He promised to be there between her and the person in need. As she pursued his instructions, she found that many were healed as a result. Isn’t that true of Jesus, also? There was no record of faith needed for the centurion’s servant, who was dying and unaware that anyone was interceding for him. Yet in his compassion, Jesus healed the servant from a distance.

My concern and hope is that many of us would deepen our faith and venture into the realm of this beautiful ministry, asking the Holy Spirit and Jesus to enlighten all of us. May he teach us how to be effective as we pray in his holy name for our neighbors who need our help.