For almost seventeen years of my life, my boldest prayer for healing was: “God, please guide the doctor’s hands.” If I am honest, I did not even really believe God could do that.

But my perspective changed radically when I began attending the Vineyard and, for the first time, heard people praying for physical healing with real expectation. Although at first it felt strange and even uncomfortable, something in my heart knew that this was closer to the heart of the Gospel than anything I had experienced before.

This personal reflection has led me to a deep conviction: divine healing does not belong exclusively to charismatic or Pentecostal denominations. I firmly believe that if traditional churches intentionally sought this biblical practice, they would see it happen more frequently in their congregations. The challenge is not to change their fundamental theology, but to rediscover dimensions of the Kingdom of God that may have been set aside for historical rather than biblical reasons.

The Puritans

When we think of the Puritans, the image that usually comes to mind is of rigorous theologians focused exclusively on doctrine. But the historical reality is much richer. The Puritans developed an extraordinarily sophisticated system for understanding the problems of the human heart, and “distinguished among a variety of physical, spiritual, temperamental, and demonic causes” in people’s problems.

Their approach to pastoral counseling did not rule out divine intervention in matters of health and well-being. The Puritans “considered the essential spiritual remedy to be believing the gospel, used both for repentance and for developing an appropriate understanding of oneself.” This perspective recognized that salvation in Christ encompasses every dimension of human experience.

What is fascinating is that their unwavering commitment to “the functional authority of Scripture” led them to take all biblical promises seriously, including those related to healing. They had neither fear nor hesitation when it came to praying for the sick—or even raising the dead!

A. B. Simpson

Albert Benjamin Simpson represents a fascinating bridge between the Reformed tradition and the practice of divine healing. Raised as “a strict Scottish Presbyterian,” Simpson experienced a change when “in 1881, he was rebaptized by immersion and experienced healing from heart problems.”

Simpson did not abandon his theological heritage; he expanded it. He developed what is known as the “Fourfold Gospel”: Christ saves, sanctifies, heals, and is coming again. This formulation connected divine healing with the central themes of the historic Christian faith.

The Christian and Missionary Alliance, which Simpson founded, aimed to “lift up Christ in all his fullness.” His ministry included “healing homes”—offering holistic, not merely physical, healing—and other activities related to divine healing. For Simpson, healing was not an optional addition to the gospel, but an integral part of the full message of Christ.

Aimee Semple McPherson

Although Aimee Semple McPherson came from a Pentecostal tradition rather than the traditional denominations, her ministry offers important lessons for all churches that have become skeptical over the years. McPherson “preached to everyone: men and women, rich and poor, from diverse ethnicities and cultures.” Her ministry demonstrated that divine healing could transcend all social and denominational barriers.

Her articulation of the “Foursquare Gospel”—“Jesus is the Savior, Jesus is the Healer, Jesus is the Baptizer with the Holy Spirit, and Jesus is the soon-coming King”—connected healing with fundamental Christian orthodoxy. Large healing events, such as the famous “Stretcher Day” in Denver in 1921, which attracted “12,000 people,” demonstrated that divine healing could be a public and verifiable reality.

The Vineyard

The Vineyard movement, although relatively recent, has contributed significantly to the theological understanding of divine healing in settings that are not traditionally charismatic. Applying George Ladd’s “Gospel of the Kingdom of God” to healing ministry has provided a solid theological framework that can resonate with different denominational traditions.

The idea that the Kingdom of God is a reality present among us, but not yet in its fullness, helps explain our mixed experience of healing. This theology of the “already but not yet” allows denominations with different theological emphases to find a common framework for understanding both healings and their occasional absence. Through the Vineyard, John Wimber made it possible for “everyone to play” or for “everyone to do what Jesus did.”

The Anglican Church

The Anglican Church, the third-largest body of Christian churches, with congregations in more than 165 countries, has historically held a unique position. Being a “middle way” between Catholicism and Protestantism has allowed an openness to healing practices that are sometimes lost in other settings.

Anglicans have maintained two sacraments, or means of grace: baptism and communion. But they also recognize the other five Catholic sacraments as important religious rites. This sacramental openness has created a theological space in which divine healing can flourish naturally.

Canon Jim Glennon of Sydney, Australia, led a healing ministry for twenty-five years that is now the largest Anglican ministry of its kind in the world. He reported that “in his church more people have been won to Christ through healing than through all other means combined.”

Mainline Protestant Denominations

The historic mainline denominations include “Baptist churches, the Episcopal Church, the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America, the Presbyterian Church, and the United Methodist Church.” These denominations, considered to represent the oldest and most influential branches of Protestantism, have a heritage that can readily rediscover the practice of healing.

These churches have maintained a religious doctrine emphasizing social justice and personal salvation. Their historic commitment to social justice can naturally extend to caring for the whole person, including physical healing.

The Will of God

As Ken Blue rightly points out in his research, one of the main obstacles to practicing healing in traditional denominations is what he calls “divine determinism.” Many believers think that “if God has decreed sickness, no amount of prayer can alter that condition.”

Yet we can offer a theologically sound alternative: if someone holds a theology in which God’s will is always fulfilled, it is possible that we do not always know that will in a particular situation. This perspective allows people from different theological backgrounds to find common ground for practicing healing.

From this understanding, prayer and persistence in seeking healing become even more relevant. We do not pray to change God’s will, but to align our actions with it and discern what it is in each specific circumstance.

I am fully convinced that if those who believe God’s will is always fulfilled prayed while acknowledging what they do not know, in order to see what happens, many more things would happen. Likewise, perhaps God’s will is for a person to be healed on prayer attempt number 1368; then we should pray for that person 1368 times. I insist: if this were our attitude, there would be an enormous record of healings within traditional churches, without any need to alter their theology or liturgy in most cases.

Evidence and Forms of Expression

Louis Berkhof, in his Systematic Theology, represents the cessationist position by arguing that “stronger evidence is needed” to validate the continuation of healing gifts. This legitimate concern about verification must be addressed seriously and honestly.

Our response should be constructive rather than defensive. As Ken Blue suggests, “a good practice is, where possible and with humility, to keep evidence of testimonies, not for the purpose of arguing back, but to strengthen people’s faith.” This approach acknowledges and validates cessationist concerns while keeping the focus on building up the body of Christ. Honestly, the faith of the whole community would grow if, alongside a testimony, there were a certified document providing evidence of God’s work.

While this might feed some people’s skepticism, I consider it highly advisable, though not obligatory.

On the other hand, many traditional churches struggle with “declaring” or “decreeing” healing. This tension often comes down more to language than to fundamental theological differences. Acknowledging, as a charismatic, that “declaring” is something the Bible encourages us to do, unlike “decreeing,” we can find appropriate ways of expressing ourselves in different denominational settings.

Instead of using language that may create unnecessary resistance, we can adopt simpler, biblical expressions. For example, instead of saying, “I declare that your right shoulder is healed,” we could say, “Right shoulder, be healed.” This change maintains biblical authority while respecting denominational sensitivities. It is the same practice and pursuit of healing, simply expressed differently. Same shirt, different color.

When Jesus said, “But if I drive out demons by the Spirit of God, then the Kingdom of God has come and is among you” (Matthew 12:28), he was connecting miracles with a theological reality that all Christian denominations can affirm. The list of Jesus’ 37 recorded miracles, 23 of which are healings, clearly reveals the priorities of the Lord’s ministry. This is not a denominational statistic; it is a biblical fact that should guide the ministry of all Christian churches.

Starting Where We Are

My fundamental conviction is that “everyone can see healings.” This is not a triumphalist statement, but a humble invitation grounded in Scripture. Not only charismatics and Pentecostals can see healings, “but also Anglicans, Lutherans, Presbyterians, Alliance members, Baptists, and others.”

The starting point is not changing our theology or denomination, but applying more fully what we already believe. If we believe Jesus is the same yesterday, today, and forever (Hebrews 13:8), then we can expect to see his healing power at work in our churches today.

My experience ministering in different denominational settings has taught me several principles that cross theological lines:

  • Always remember that ministering healing to others means loving people. This principle resonates with every Christian tradition because it connects healing with the fundamental commandment of love.
  • Do not cling only to your own way of doing things. Methodological flexibility allows different denominations to maintain their identity while participating in the work of healing. When I ministered in a traditional charismatic church, my brief prayers initially did not resonate with a congregation accustomed to “long, expansive prayers with many Bible verses.” When I adapted my style, almost everyone who received prayer was healed.
  • Keep persevering. Persistence in prayer is a value shared by every Christian tradition, regardless of its position on specific gifts. We do not need to be traditionalists to hold firmly to God’s Word.
  • Share testimonies. Sharing real experiences of God’s goodness builds faith in every denominational context. You do not need to be particularly charismatic to tell a testimony.
  • It is important to maintain realistic expectations. I would like to tell you that every sick person you pray for will be healed, but that is simply not the case. This honesty is crucial to maintaining integrity in any denominational context. Yet precisely because we do not know what will happen, we can consider that perhaps God will act on prayer number 1368, or that on number 1369 he will show us that his will is otherwise. But until there is collective and irrefutable evidence that God does not wish to act in that direction, we cannot pray fewer than 1368 times, and our attitude must continue to favor healing.

Yet I also firmly believe, as everyone does, that “God always heals.” I acknowledge that “sometimes healing takes time to arrive,” or that we may not see it in this “age.” But whether “through prayer and the breaking in of the Kingdom among us” or on the day when “Christ returns,” healing will come. This allows us to maintain hope while living with mixed results, knowing that we all embrace the same idea.

In Closing

Paradoxically, the practice of divine healing, when carried out with humility, love, and biblical faithfulness, does not divide the church but unites it around the person and work of Jesus. I have seen how Baptists, Presbyterians, Methodists, and Anglicans can pray together for the sick when the focus is on Jesus rather than our differences.

My purpose is not to convince every denomination to adopt specific charismatic methods, but to invite them to rediscover the riches of their own heritage concerning God’s healing work. The goal is to build a “bridge” so that others embrace and practice this beyond their particular theology.

Each background can express this practice in a way that is consistent with its theological and historical identity. Anglicans can emphasize the sacramental aspects, Presbyterians can focus on God’s sovereignty, Methodists can connect it with sanctification, and so on.

My journey from a traditional Presbyterian church to an active practice of divine healing has taught me that the Kingdom of God is bigger than our denominational categories. My first charismatic experiences began in a Presbyterian church. Divine healing is not an extremely charismatic or denominational practice, but a natural expression of the gospel of Jesus Christ that can flourish in any setting that honors Scripture and seeks God’s glory. When we clear away these obstacles and return to a straightforward reading of Scripture, we discover that healing is an integral part of the message of the Kingdom of God.

It is time to build bridges and see God’s glory revealed throughout his whole church, regardless of our particular traditions. The Kingdom of God has come, and all of us, whatever our denomination, can be its ambassadors in a world that desperately needs to experience the healing power and love of Jesus.

Bibliography

A. B. Simpson, El Poder de lo Alto

Francisco Tapia, Cómo Sanar a los Enfermos

John Wimber, Sanidad Poderosa

Ken Blue, Authority to Heal

Louis Berkhof, Teología Sistemática

Randy Clark, Authority to Heal

Wayne Grudem, Teología Sistemática