Medicine and prayer

My husband comes from a very religious family. They are fervent believers in prayer.

However, they are also fervent believers in medicine. Several family members have suffered serious illnesses over the past decade and in each case, while they prayed fervently for healing as well as courage, they wasted no time in seeking medical help to treat their conditions. They are all doing well now, having been the recipients of some of the most advanced medical treatments available.

I can't imagine any of them ever believing that prayer alone would cure or successfully manage their illnesses. They believe that medicine is part of God's world and is there for all of us to utilize.

Once again, though, we read the story of a family that refused medical treatment for a child because of their belief that God alone would provide a cure. An eleven year old girl is dead today because instead of seeking treatment for their daughter's highly treatable diabetes, a family chose to stay home and pray for direct divine intervention.

How sad it is to me that any parent could put any belief – religious or otherwise - over the well being of their own child. And how foolish it is for anyone to believe that God only works through direct intervention as a result of someone's prayers, rather than indirectly through medicine.

Are some people really so naïve that they can't see that all medicine is the result of discoveries made by the very human beings, with the very exceptional brains, that they also believe were made by God? Do these believers think that human beings were all put here to live in isolation and not help each other with scientific and medical advances?

I have never seen a contradiction between religion and science, between prayer and medicine, or between the possibility that God created the world and the probability that he did it slowly, through evolution. But others, apparently, insist on creating that divide, even when the consequences are deadly.

How about this for a possibility? What if God created the world, and specifically created intelligent human beings to preserve creation, make the world a better place, manage resources, provide for the needs of all the creatures on the earth, heal illness, mediate disputes and create a prosperous and peaceful planet? What if he did this so that humans would turn to each other for solutions rather than expect him to intervene individually in each isolated case? If this was indeed God's plan, then human beings who reject that plan are really rejecting God.

Whatever the theology, I think it is time we hold parents like these criminally responsible for the unnecessary deaths of their children. If a parent had a chance to stop a child from running into the street and stood by and simply prayed that the child would stay put, and then that child was run over by a car, we would hold the parent responsible. This seems no different to me.

Prayer can be a great comfort, and an adjunct to medicine, but it is both stubborn and stupid, in my opinion, for any parent to believe that when simple medical care is available to save their child's life, they reject that medical care and expect God to intervene directly in their child's condition. It seems to me God already answered their prayers when he created human beings who developed life saving medicine. To insist that God save your child the way you want them saved, and not in the way that is already provided, is the height of arrogance.

Why Romney's "JFK moment" won't work

Mitt Romney has decided to channel JFK and give a speech about his religion. Spooked by the recent Huckabee surge in the Iowa polls, Romney wants to reassure Iowans that his Mormonism is not all that different from their Christianity, and that it will not determine the decisions he makes as president.

I suspect this ploy won't work for two reasons.

First, Mormonism is very different from the various Christian faiths in the United States. Mormons may, as Romney said, believe in the Bible, but they also believe in extra scriptures, among them The Book of Mormon and Doctrine and Covenants. Mormons also do not believe in the literal interpretation of the Bible and are suspicious of its accuracy. As Joseph Smith said, "I believe the Bible as it read when it came from the pen of the original writers. Ignorant translators, careless transcribers, or designing and corrupt priests have committed many errors." While some traditional Christians might agree with parts of this statement, it will not sit well with many others.

Mormons consider themselves nontraditional Christians, or a new type of Christian, and their desire is to convert traditional Christians to what they maintain is the true faith. That faith involves believing the teachings of Joseph Smith that, among other things, Mormons are called to restore the true Gospel of Jesus Christ that has been distorted by other churches. Again, this will not go over positively with most evangelical Christians.

Mormons also conduct secret ceremonies in a Temple which is off limits to all but a select group of Mormons in good standing. My guess is that most American Christians, who open their churches to all not just for the purpose of worship, but for the purpose of evangelism, would find this bizarre, elitist and even dangerous.

During JFK's run for the presidency, there was very real prejudice, mostly based on disinformation, against Catholics, but there are not that many differences in core beliefs between Catholics and Protestants. Both believe in the same scriptures and neither has extra scriptures unacceptable to the other group. And finally, the Catholic Church does not exclude people from its churches nor conduct secret ceremonies. Therefore, the main thing JFK had to reassure voters about was that he would not take orders from the Pope. Unlike Romney, he was not in the position of having to convince most Americans that he was a Christian, or that he believed the same things they did.

Second, we are living in a different age than the one in which JFK made his speech. Separation of church and state was the issue then, and evangelical Christianity was not the force that it is now. In JFK's time, most Americans worshipped privately, and wanted all religion to stay out of government. Today many Christians would like to see more of a connection between church and state, but only if the church is of the evangelical Christian variety. Because of this, a Mormon president would simply be unacceptable. So this puts Romney in an impossible situation. Romney must try to convince voters that his religion will not be brought into the oval office, when what the Republican base really wants to hear is that a candidate will bring his faith there, only it can't be Romney's faith.

This is why Huckabee is surging in Iowa. He will bring church and state together, and not only is his Christian faith acceptable to the Republican base, but Huckabee is an ordained Baptist minister.

With the evangelical Christians having found an acceptable candidate, Romney's presidential bid will soon be dead. And the speech he plans to give, unlike the speech given by JFK, will not help resurrect it.