Last refuge of . . .

I recall being in a discussion group about ancient faith communities who had committed, among other good works, to taking in persons who had suffered emotional damage of one sort or another. The idea was that these communities would welcome the sufferer and provide a quiet, safe and nurturing environment in which he/she could heal from emotional pain.

The expectation was that the time of healing would be finite. The sufferer would be restored to emotional health and either join the committee as one who was capable and willing to nurture others - with a sense of empathy. Or, he/she would leave the community and return to the world, restored to emotional health and capable of functioning productively. The community didn't particular care which outcome was realized - only that the person was healed, thus making space available for others.

It occurs to me that our contemporary faith communities understand the part about creating healing space for those who have been harmed in one way or another, but lack the expectation that they will eventually be healed. The problem lies in both sides of the relationship. The communities are only to happy to nurture ad infinitum the lost lamb. And, the lamb is only too happy to remain lost, demanding endless spiritual care, always too fragile to take the role of healer.

Someone I'm close to has characterized the church as the last refuge of screw-ups. I don't consider myself at liberty to be quite so harsh, but I understand what he's talking about and I don't necessarily disagree.

In the healing stories in the gospels, the ones who are healed always get well. Jesus and his followers expect it to happen and it does. In the baptismal covenant we promise to respect the dignity of all persons - but doesn't that mean holding them accountable for realizing the level of emotional health of which they're truly capable?