Ethical dilemma

[Monica]

. Because if someone didn't want to be healed or didn't believe that they could be, it wouldn't happen.

Completely untrue.

Maybe our difference in opinion has to do with whether it's conscious or not.

I would agree that the person doesn't need to be consciously desiring healing, or consciously believing that they can be healed.

But I do think that, on some level, the entity must have been receptive to the healing, for it to take place. This explains why, regardless of the healing modality (whether drugs, faith healing, or whatever), some are healed and some aren't.

Then there is the question of whether it's permanent or not. The healer may effect a temporary healing, but if the person doesn't choose to receive it, they'll just fall back into their old pattern of illness.

I don't think it's possible for a healer to totally, permanently heal another person without their permission on a soul level.

Now that I've added this clarification, if you still disagree, I'd be interested in hearing why, if you care to elaborate or provide an example.