For almost seventeen years of my life, my bravest prayer for healing was: “God, I pray that You guide the doctor’s hands.” If I am honest, I didn’t even really believe that 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 it felt strange and even uncomfortable at first, something in my heart knew that this was closer to the heart of the Gospel than what I had experienced before.
This personal reflection has led me to a deep conviction: divine healing is not the exclusive property of Charismatic or Pentecostal denominations. I firmly believe that if traditional churches set out to intentionally seek this biblical practice, they would see it manifest more frequently in their congregations. The challenge is not to change their fundamental theology, but to rediscover dimensions of the Kingdom of God that have perhaps been set aside for historical reasons rather than biblical ones.
The Puritans
When we think of the Puritans, the image that typically comes to mind is one 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 they “distinguished between a variety of physical, spiritual, temperamental, and demonic causes” in people’s struggles.
Their approach to pastoral counseling did not rule out divine intervention in matters of health and well-being. The Puritans “considered that the essential spiritual remedy was believing the gospel, used both for repentance and for the development of proper self-understanding.” This perspective recognized that salvation in Christ encompasses all dimensions of the 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 no fear or doubt 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 underwent a change when “in 1881, he was re-baptized 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 historical Christian faith.
The Christian and Missionary Alliance, which Simpson founded, had the purpose of “lifting up Christ in all His fullness.” His ministry included “healing homes” (integral, not just physical) and other activities related to divine healing. For Simpson, healing was not an optional add-on to the gospel, but an integral part of Christ’s complete message.
Aimee Semple McPherson
Although Aimee Semple McPherson comes from a Pentecostal tradition rather than a traditional denomination, 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, of 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 Coming King”—connected healing with fundamental Christian orthodoxy. Massive 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, though relatively recent, has contributed significantly to the theological understanding of divine healing in non-traditionally Charismatic contexts. The application of 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 the mixed experience we have with 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 allowed for the idea that “everyone gets to play” or “everyone can do what Jesus did.”
The Anglican Church
The Anglican Church, being the third-largest communion of Christian churches with congregations in more than 165 countries, has historically maintained a unique position. Being a “middle way” (via media) between Catholicism and Protestantism has allowed for an openness to healing practices that are sometimes lost in other contexts.
Anglicans have maintained two sacraments (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 where 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 by all other means combined.”
Mainline Protestant Denominations
The mainline historical 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 rediscover the practice of healing without issue.
These churches have maintained a religious doctrine that emphasizes social justice and personal salvation. Their historical commitment to social justice can naturally extend toward the integral care of people, including physical healing.
The Will of God
As Ken Blue rightly says in his research, one of the main obstacles to the practice of 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 state.”
However, we can propose a theologically sound alternative: if someone holds a theology where God’s will is always fulfilled, it is possible that we do not always know what that will is in a particular situation. This perspective allows people from different theological backgrounds to find common ground for the practice of healing.
From this understanding, prayer and insistence on 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 totally convinced that if those who believe God’s will is always fulfilled prayed from an acknowledgment of their ignorance (with the purpose of seeing what happens), many more things would occur. By the same token, perhaps God’s will is for a person to be healed on prayer attempt number 1,368; therefore, we should pray for them 1,368 times. I insist: if this were the attitude, there would be an enormous record of healings within traditional churches, without the need to alter their theology and liturgy in most cases.
Evidence and Forms
Louis Berkhof, in his Systematic Theology, represents the Cessationist position by arguing that “stronger proofs are needed” to validate the continuity of the gifts of healing. This legitimate concern for verifiability must be addressed with seriousness and honesty.
The response should not be defensive, but constructive. As Ken Blue suggests, “a good practice is (whenever possible and humbly) to keep records of testimony, not for the purpose of rebutting, but to strengthen people’s faith.” This approach recognizes (and validates) Cessationist concerns while maintaining focus on edifying the body of Christ. Honestly, the faith of the entire community would grow if, in addition to the testimony, there were a certified document evidencing God’s work.
While this might fuel some people’s skepticism, I consider it highly recommended, though not mandatory.
On the other hand, many traditional churches find it conflicting to “declare” or “decree” healing. This tension usually comes down more to questions of language than fundamental theological differences. Recognizing (as a Charismatic) that “declaring” is something the Bible encourages us to do (as opposed to “decreeing”), we can find suitable forms of expression for different denominational contexts.
Instead of using language that might generate unnecessary resistance, we can adopt simpler and more 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, just with a different form. Same shirt, different color.
When Jesus said, “But if it is by the Spirit of God that I drive out demons, then the kingdom of God has come upon you” (Matthew 12:28), He was connecting miracles with a theological reality that all Christian denominations can affirm. The list of the 37 recorded miracles of Jesus (of which 23 are healings) clearly reveals the priorities of the Lord’s ministry. This is not a denominational statistic; it is a biblical fact that should orient 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 based on Scripture. Not only can Charismatics and Pentecostals see healings, “but also Anglicans, Lutherans, Presbyterians, Alliance members, Baptists, and others.”
The starting point is not to change a theology or denomination, but to apply more fully what we already believe. If we believe that Jesus is the same yesterday, today, and forever (Hebrews 13:8), then we can expect to see His healing power manifest today in our churches.
My experience ministering in different denominational contexts has taught me several principles that transcend theological lines:
Always remember that ministering healing to others is loving people. This principle resonates with all Christian traditions because it connects healing with the fundamental commandment of love.
Don’t get stuck on just your way. Methodological flexibility allows different denominations to maintain their identity while participating in the work of healing. When I ministered in a traditional Charismatic church, initially my brief prayers didn’t resonate with the congregation, who were used to “long, drawn-out prayers with many Bible verses.” When I adapted my style, almost everyone who received prayer was healed.
Do not stop persisting. Persistence in prayer is a value shared by all Christian traditions, regardless of their position on specific gifts. We don’t need to be traditionalists to stand firm on the Word of God.
Tell testimonies. Sharing real experiences of God’s goodness builds faith in all denominational contexts. You don’t need to be very Charismatic to share a testimony.
It is important to maintain realistic expectations. I would love to tell you that every sick person you pray for will be healed, but that is simply not the case. This honesty is crucial for maintaining integrity in any denominational context. However, precisely because we don’t know what will happen, we can think that perhaps God will act on prayer number 1,368, or that on 1,369 He will show us His will is different. But until there is collective and irrefutable evidence that God does not wish to work in that way, we cannot pray fewer than 1,368 times, and our attitude must remain in favor of healing.
However, I also firmly believe (as does everyone) that “God always heals.” I recognize that “sometimes healing takes time to arrive,” or perhaps in this “age” we won’t see it, but whether it is “through prayer and the irruption of the Kingdom in our midst,” 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.
Conclusion
Paradoxically, the practice of divine healing, when done 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 and not on our differences.
My purpose is not to convince all denominations to adopt specific Charismatic methodologies, but to invite them to rediscover the riches of their own heritage regarding God’s healing work. The goal is to build a “bridge” for others to 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 sacramental aspects, Presbyterians can focus on the sovereignty of God, Methodists can connect it with sanctification, and so on.
My story—moving 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 context that honors Scripture and seeks the glory of God. When we clear the ground of these obstacles and return to a simple 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 the glory of God manifest through His whole church, regardless of our particular traditions. The Kingdom of God has come, and all of us (regardless of our denomination) can be His ambassadors in a world that desperately needs to experience the healing power and love of Jesus.
Bibliography
A.B. Simpson, The Power from on High
Francisco Tapia, Cómo Sanar a los Enfermos (How to Heal the Sick)
John Wimber, Power Healing
Ken Blue, Authority to Heal
Louis Berkhof, Systematic Theology
Randy Clark, Authority to Heal (Note: Likely refers to There Is More or similar works on healing authority)
Wayne Grudem, Systematic Theology
