Audacity article

Please check out an opinion piece I wrote for Audacity magizine at the following website.

http://audacitymagazine.com/audacity.php?op=article&y=grfx&v=&i=26&a=322

McNair

The Best and the Worst

It is interesting, that whenever someone wants to make the harshest criticism possible, they compare the behavior of an individual, or a group or a nation to that of Nazi Germany. We can hardly imagine a worse situation then what went on there. It was horrific for so many people representing many different characteristics which were deemed negative by the evil ones in charge. It was the same for persons with disabilities at that time.

We might also think about the worst of times in our own nation (America) with conditions in institutions for persons with disabilities. But as inhumane as those conditions were, they still don't compare with the life taking that occurred under the Nazi regime.

But then, I wonder what I would use for comparison for the absolute best the world has had to offer over the centuries, particularly for persons with disabilities. What might we point to and say, "This is how it should be, this would be the best situation." In considering the world's best, I wonder whether there would be any mention of programs or services, or attitudes, or sacrifice by the church who follow the teachings of Jesus Christ? Would that we could point to our times, have people remember how the birth of love and caring for persons with disabilities really began to happen in the early 2000's. Would that future people would say, "The enfolding of persons into the church that we enjoy today, started then and caught on in the community. It was that caring by the church which shamed the secularists, or at best chided them into being all they could be to persons with disability."

We have plenty examples of the worst. How about we become the example of the absolute best that the world has to offer. The absolute best!

McNair

Ezekiel 34 Part 2

Lets continue to consider Ezekiel 34 for a moment. It continues on, saying,

Therefore this is what the Sovereign Lord says to them: See, I myself will judge between the fat sheep and the lean sheep.

You know, a significant number of persons with mental retardation are "lean sheep" in that they live in poverty, often on fixed incomes. They are poor.

Because you shove with flank and shoulder, butting all the weak sheep with your horns until you have driven them away.

I think there have been times when the fat sheep have shoved the lean ones away. Maybe not with shoulder and flank, but with words and attitudes for sure. With the power they excercise over all the sheep. They shove out by saying that such ministry is not a priority, or that they haven't the money to do such ministry or bring them in. In these ways they give a more holy face to their actions which shove out.

I will save my flock and they will no longer be plundered. I will judge between one sheep and another.

Should God judge between the poor with limited resources and the rich with great resources, how do you think the rich will fare? Will God say that the poor and disabled were not a priority for Him either?

If the church was doing what it should, then

They will live in safety, and no one will make them afraid.
I will provide for them a land renowned for its crops, and they will no longer be victims of famine in the land or bear the scorn of the nations.
Then they will know that I, the Lord their God am with them and that they, the house of Israel are my people, declares the Sovereign Lord.

I think it poignant the way this passage ends. I am not sure what the actual meaning of the last line is, but as stated it is a simple yet jarring statement. The implication is that you might not have recognized the obvious fact of the statement.

You my sheep, the sheep of my pasture, are people and I am your God, declares the Sovereign Lord.

The group we are talking about, are not sheep or something other than people. They are people, the Sovereign Lord declares. People are always a priority, or at least should be. In the Christian faith, if they are not, then what is being evidenced is not the Christian faith.

McNair

Ezekiel 34 Part 1

Lets dance with a few sections of this passage, thinking about the church as the shepherds and persons with disability as the flock. I have pulled a few of the sections of Ezekial 34 out because of their particular applicability.

Woe to the shepherds of Israel who only take care of themselves!
Should not shepherds take care of the flock?

I think the implication is that some sheep were taken care of and some were not. Apparently the shepherds took care of themselves and their families, however, there was a group of people who were ignored. Who were they specifically?

You have not strengthened the weak or healed the sick or bound up the injured.
You have not brought back the strays or searched for the lost.
You have ruled them harshly and brutally.

The weak sick and injured were not strengthened, or healed or bound up. Additionally, they didn't bring back the strays (it seems the assumption is that they knew where the strays were) or search for the lost. Once again, it seems the assumption is that they knew they were lost. Instead, what did they do? They ruled them harshly and brutally. Now I don't know about brutality of the church persons with disability, but I have experienced and read about some harsh treatment on the part of the church towards persons with disability. Examples of that treatment are provided elsewhere in this blog.

So they were scattered because there was no shepherd, and when they were scattered they became food for all the wild animals.

Persons with disability often live at or below the poverty line. When you are poor, you live where other poor people live. There are many nere do well people who live among the poor and like wild animals they take advantage of the poor, particularly the mentally disabled poor. But why were they scattered? Because there was no shepherd. You don't know how often I hear church leaders excuse themselves from responsibility for persons with disability because of the their lack of funds. There are funds for other programs, oftentimes for programs for people who are not scattered or weak or sick or injured.

My sheep wandered over the mountains and on every high hill.
They were scattered over the whole earth, and no one searched or looked for them.

I was floored to find out that 20% of the population of the United States are disabled. Not all are cognitively disabled, but disabled nontheless. Why isn't the church looking for these people to bring them in. One could take the idea of being scattered as being lost, but one could also take it as that they are everywhere. They are on every high hill. But no one is looking for them.

More on the rest of this section in part 2.

McNair



"Therefore this is what the Sovereign Lord says to them: See, I myself will judge between the fat sheep and the lean sheep. Because you shove with flank and shoulder, butting all the weak sheep with your horns until you have driven them away. I will save my flock and they will no longer be plundered. I will judge between one sheep and another. I will place over them one shepherd, my servant David, and he will tend them: he will tend them and be their shepherd. I the Lord will be their God, and my servant David will be prince among them. I the Lord have spoken.

They will live in safety, and no one will make them afraid.
I will provide for them a land renowned for its crops, and they will no longer be victims of famine in the land or bear the scorn of the nations.
Then they will know that I, the Lord their God am with them and that they, the house of Israel are my people, declares the Sovereign Lord.
You my sheep, the sheep of my pasture, are people and I am your God, declares the Sovereign Lord."

Ezekiel 34

A student of mine, Ms. Kimberly DeHuff shared a verse she had noticed in the book of Ezekiel. She encouraged me to read it with persons with disability in mind. It is really powerful. I provide it here fyi, and will try to unpack it a bit over the next few blogs.

Ezekiel 34
The word of the Lord came to me: "Son of man, prophesy against the shepherds of Israel; prophesy and say to them: 'This is what the Sovereign Lord says: Woe to the shepherds of Israel who only take care of themselves! Should not shepherds take care of the flock?
You eat the curds, clothes yourselves with the wool and slaughter the choice animals, but you do not take care of the flock. You have not strengthened the weak or healed the sick or bound up the injured. You have not brought back the strays or searched for the lost.
You have ruled them harshly and brutally. So they were scattered because there was no shepherd, and when they were scattered they became food for all the wild animals. My sheep wandered over the mountains and on every high hill. They were scattered over the whole earth, and no one searched or looked for them.

"Therefore, you shepherds, hear the word of the Lord: As surely as I live, declares the Sovereign Lord, because my flock lacks a shepherd and so has been plundered and has become food for all the wild animals, and because my shepherds did not search for my flock but cared for themselves rather than my flock, therefore, O shepherds, hear the word of the Lord: This is what the Sovereign Lord says: I am against the shepherds and will hold them accountable for my flock. I will remove them from tending the flock so that the shepherds can no longer feed themselves. I will rescue my flock from their mouths, and it will no longer be food for them.

"For this is what the Sovereign Lord says: I myself will search for my sheep and look after them. As a shepherd looks after his scattered flock when he is with them, so will I look after my sheep. I will rescue them from all the places where they were scattered on a day of clouds and darkness. I will bring them out from the nations and gather them from the countries and I will bring them into their own land. I will pasture them on the mountains of Israel, in the ravines and tend them in the good pasture, and the mountain heights of Israel will be their grazing land. There they will lie down in a rich pasture on the mountains of Israel. I myself will tend my sheep and have them lie down, declares the Sovereign Lord. I will search for the lost and bring back the strays. I will bind up the injured and strengthen the weak, but the sleek and the strong I will destroy. I will shepherd the flock with justice.

"As for you, my flock, this is what the Sovereign Lord says: I will judge between one sheep and another and between rams and goats. Is it not enough for you to feed on the good pasture? Must you also trample the rest of your pasture with your feet? Is it not enough for you to drink clear water? Must you also muddy the rest with your feet? Must my flock feed on what you have trampled and drink what you have muddied with your feet?

"Therefore this is what the Sovereign Lord says to them: See, I myself will judge between the fat sheep and the lean sheep. Because you shove with flank and shoulder, butting all the weak sheep with your horns until you have driven them away. I will save my flock and they will no longer be plundered. I will judge between one sheep and another. I will place over them one shepherd, my servant David, and he will tend them: he will tend them and be their shepherd. I the Lord will be their God, and my servant David will be prince among them. I the Lord have spoken.

"I will make a covenant of peace with them and rid the land of wild beasts so that they may live in the desert and sleep in the forests in safety. I will bless them and the places surrounding my hill. I will send down showers in season: there will be showers of blessing. The trees of the field will yield their fruit and the ground will yield its crops; the people will be secure in their land. They will know that I am the Lord, when I break the bars of their yoke and rescue them from the hands of those who enslaved them. They will no longer be plundered by the nations, nor will wild animals devour them. They will live in safety, and no one will make them afraid. I will provide for them a land renowned for its crops, and they will no longer be victims of famine in the land or bear the scorn of the nations. Then they will know that I, the Lord their God am with them and that they, the house of Israel are my people, declares the Sovereign Lord. You my sheep, the sheep of my pasture, are people and I am your God, declares the Sovereign Lord."

Very powerful to think of the shepherds as we in the church, whether we be in leadership or not, and the sheep being those who are disabled or disenfranchised.

McNair

Not really a new way to discriminate

Last night we had another meeting in Redlands Ca. relating to a group home for medically fragile, developmentally disabled adults. A group of neighbors to the future home were there and they claimed their major cause for concern was that the group home developer represented himself as adhering to the homeowners association agreement, and then changed the home by putting doors on the sides of the house so the wheelchair bound residents could exit the building in case of fire. They were appalled that he would be dishonest in this manner.

Now I agree that he may have done this, not be entirely honest. He may have signed the homeowners' agreement with the full knowledge that he was going to make alterations to the home, and that was not entirely truthful. But I also sat there amazed at the people who were using this argument to discriminate against persons with developmental disabilities. They spoke of property values going down, and how the neighborhood would be devalued, of how their children would be unsafe and how the house would be poorly kept all due to the placement of the home in the community. They even had the nerve to ask whether people would be "peeing in their bushes."

As a boy, I grew up in a predominantly white neighborhood of Southern New Jersey. There were very few African Americans or Hispanics, or other persons who weren't white who lived in my neighborhood. I can clearly recall hearing adults talk about how the property values would go down, how the homes would not be properly cared for, how they feared for their children should anyone other than a white person fill any vacant house in the neighborhood. I can even remember people speaking about an unwritten agreement that homes would not be sold to anyone other than a white person. This is correctly referred to as bigotry or racism.

Yet, although there were those in the meeting from groups who have experienced significant bigotry and racism, they didn't connect their behavior to that of others who experienced discrimination.

Now imagine I developed a homeowners' association, and somehow we were able to establish a rule about homes that would somehow prohibit persons of ethnicity X from living in the neighborhood. However, a person of ethnicity X wants to live in the neighborhood. In order to live in the neighborhood, the person of ethnicity X comes in and makes the change required for him to live in the neighborhood, and the homeowners' association comes down against him for breaking the homeowners' association's rules. Can you imagine the charges of racism or bigotry? Those charges would be justified, unless the homeowners' association reflected on their rules and said, "We have made a huge mistake. We didn't intend our rules to be discriminatory against group X." If, however, that same homeowners association said, "We don't care, we have a homeowners' association and those are the rules," we would begin to wonder about their motives.

Well, the homes in question do not allow for particular types of modifications. In this case, the doors which were added to the sides of the house, to allow for the exit of the wheelchair bound residents were against the homeowners' rules. So in effect, persons having the types of disabilities of those who will live in the group home are excluded from the neighborhood. It was countered that the backside of the house is wheelchair accessible. The association rules indicated, however, that no ramps were permitted to be added to the front of the house. As one person commented, "If I am going to spend 500K for a home, I'm going in the front door."

Can you see how this is a civil rights issue? I can write seemingly innocuous rules, which are largely to protect the aesthetics of the neighborhood, which in reality can be discriminatory against a particular group of people. Not people who want to paint their house purple, but people who want to go into the front door of their house, or be able to get out in case of a fire.

By the way, to my knowledge, there was only one pastor of a church who attended any of the meetings, and he is the parent of a son with a disability.

What ever happened to doing justice?

McNair

A hero's perspective

I picked up a copy of Beowulf at a used book sale. It is a story I love because of the way it portrays heroism in the face of absolute despair. The Danes of the story, were literally just waiting for Grendel to come and eat them in the most hideous manner. Beowulf, however, comes onto the scene, and well, without giving away the ending, is the hero. In describing Beowulf, the book says the following

"Beowulf was the rare kind of person who makes strength of his own weaknesses. His eyes being poor, he determined to see not just as well as other people, but better than most. He did this by cultivating habits of quickness and concentration that enabled him to be truly seeing where others were only looking. And this matter of the eyes was typical of his whole manner of being. Beowulf had made the best of all he had, putting each imperfection to work in the service of his integrity. Thus, his real strength lay in the balance of his person-which is, perhaps, another way of saying that he was strong because he was good and good because he had the strength to accept things in him that were bad." (from Beowulf A new telling by Robery Nye,1968)

In understanding his weakness, Beowulf determined to be better than most in his area of weakness. Weaknesses can cause us to throw up our hands and give up, or can spur us on to work through those weaknesses. Weaknesses can become excuses, or can cause us to see things in a different way, solve problems in a different way, to the point of out doing those who don't experience our weakness. I think about this with small churches. One of the excuses for not engaging in ministry to persons with disability from small churches is the supposed cost of such ministries, the resources required, etc. Taken to its logical conclusion, small churches are not responsible for ministry until they become big churches. But God calls us to be sheep, not goats, and there are no caviats for the service He requires. Does Jesus anywhere say, you know, when you have sufficient resources, then you can begin to be involved in service. But until then, you don't have to do anything.
Actually, I think that small churches have many advantages over other types and sizes of organizations. Relative to persons with disabilities, I wonder whether they have taken the time to find out what those advantages might be. It is interesting in the literature on employment of persons with disabilities, for example, that small mom and pop work places are often desirable over larger corporations. Why? Because the workers with disabilities become more pivotal to the functioning of the business. They begin to be seen for their strengths, and are relied upon. Larger corporations have the luxury of many employees, and therefore don't need to depend upon individuals quite as much. Small churches, therefore, might hold the greatest potential for integrating persons with disability and really tapping the depths of the gifts they bring.

Beowulf also wanted to be able to see in areas where others were only looking. I live on 5 acres and have a big time gopher problem. That is, until I started trying to see them and shoot them with my .22 rifle (I know, it sounds very red neck, but I am getting pretty good at it and my yard isn't as swiss cheesy as it was). Anyway, I have gotten to where when I look at my yard, I can detect the tiny movements of the gophers, whereas before, it seemed I never saw a gopher, just the hundreds of holes which told me they were there. You can be in a setting, even looking around in that setting and never see the setting. I am delighting in students of mine at California Baptist University, who have been looking at their churches and seeing the absence of persons with disabilities. They are gaining Beowulf's eyes in seeing what others are only looking at. I would argue that they are gaining a glimpse of God's perception of the setting. They are seeing the absence of persons whom He loves.

Finally he worked at putting each imperfection to the service of his integrity. This is an interesting notion, which is actually scriptural. We know of passages where we hear that faith is perfected in weakness, or in Paul quoting God, "My grace is sufficient for you." Do we know how to put our imperfections in the service of our integrity? Do we have even the faintest notion of helping others to put their imperfections in the service of their integrity? I am often impressed by the faith of persons with mental retardation whom I know. They are by all measures, cognitively impaired. Yet they often have what Christ says that I need, the faith of a child. I get hung up on doctrine, and experience. I get confused by my normal intellect. They have the faith of a child. I am not prepared to say that people experience "disability" so that they can put their "imperfections" to the service of their integrity, however, there is that potential, and the church is the perfect agent to facilitate that understanding of disability. But people with disabilities need to be in the church, and we need to be prepared to help them to connect the dots to make sense of their life experience, particularly for those with disabilities acquired later in life.

McNair

The log in my own eye

PRISM ePistle [epistle@esa-online.org] is an emailed newsletter which speaks to social issues of our day, and is related to Evangelicals for Social Responsibility's Prism magazine. The epistle dated Wednesday, April 20, 2005 began with the following "Thought for the day," a quote from Soren Kierkegaard. It caught me off guard with its directness and cut me to the quick.

THOUGHT FOR THE DAY
"The matter is quite simple. The Bible is very easy to understand. But we Christians are a bunch of scheming swindlers. We pretend to be unable to understand it because we know very well that the minute we understand we are obliged to act accordingly. Take any words in the New Testament and forget everything except pledging yourself to act accordingly. My God, you will say, if I do that my whole life will be ruined. Herein lies the real place of Christian scholarship. Christian scholarship is the Church's prodigious invention to defend itself against the Bible, to ensure that we can continue to be good Christians without the Bible coming too close. Dreadful it is to fall into the hands of the living God. Yes, it is even dreadful to be alone with the New Testament."
- Soren Kierkegaard, from "Kill the Commentators" in PROVOCATIONS

Wow. I see that sentiment in myself. The New Testament is scary in the demands it makes on a person. Without the forgiveness of Christ it would indeed be "dreadful to be alone with the New Testament." As a man with a family a job and other responsibilities I have chosen, embraced in life, I wonder if I, myself am who I should be. I could easily spend myself, pour myself out like a drink offering. The opportunities to do good, the venues for service, the people I could touch are weighed over against the decisions I make. I think back on the Tolkien reference I made in the last entry:

"They do not perceive the complexity of any given situation in Time, in which an absolute ideal is enmeshed."

I pray that I see the enmeshed ideals in common human interactions.God forbid that I should pretend to be unable to understand or even ignore what I know that I should do, because I know very well that the minute I allow the realization of understanding, that I will be obliged to act accordingly.

I will continue to exhort the church, but as Bob Bennet says in his song, "may the words of my mouth fall to my heart."

McNair

City Council/Group Home

In the city in which I live, Redlands California, there was a city council meeting last night. One aspect of the meeting was a discussion of a group home for medically fragile, developmentally disabled adults which was scheduled to go into a neighborhood in Redlands. It was an interesting barometer of the sentiment of some people towards persons with mental retardation. Kathi and I left there feeling like we had a inkling into what community discrimination on the basis of race might have felt like.

Anyway, one person got up and chided the City Council that when an adult from the group home runs out into the street and gets hit by a car, it will be their fault. Another person dramatically waved at her baby (who perhaps,lucky for her was not disabled, but probably will be as a result of growing up with that mother, at least attitudinally) during her remarks about how it will be dangerous for her daughter if mentally retarded people live in the neighborhood. A man stood up and related how the group home developer had told him not to make eye contact or say hello to the residents because they will not leave you alone. I would hope a group home developer would have better sense than to say something like that which could hardly help but inflame the fears of the persons having homes around the group home. Next a woman spoke up wondering where the churches and religious people of the community were on this issue. That the community needed to be more accepting. A speaker from a state agency spoke about group home regulations, and in some ways added to the irrational fears rather than allying them. A mother of a man with disabilities spoke from her experience and hoped that a man like her son would be accepted by the community.

At that point I was called on and went forward with two of my friends who were adults with developmental disabilities living in group homes. Joyce is a woman with higher cognitive abilities and Josh a man with lower abilities in that area. Joyce told that she worked at Baker's Restaurant and her recent trip to Las Vegas to see Tom Jones, and I described Josh's work at an adult day care center. Anyway, I introduced them, spoke briefly about the fear of the unknown, how when families have a child born to them they are suddenly struck with the discrimination of the community (of which they may have been a part in the past) and expressed my desire to get into the face of the group home developer about his comments regarding not interacting with the adults who would live in the group home. I was reminded of the statistic that says that many adults with developmental disabilities only know one person without disability in the community and many none. No doubt the warnings of people like the group home developer fuel such lonliness. It also made me wonder about the fitness of the developer to have group homes if he was that misinformed about who persons with mental retardation are. I concluded my remarks (3 min) by saying the reason that he probably made the comment about not interacting is that the adults would try to develop a friendship with their community neighbors. At that point, Susan Peppler, the Mayor of Redlands graciously commented that they would be good people (the group home members) to develop a friendship with, or something to that effect. The audience applauded briefly, and Josh became very animated, making the "raise the roof" gesture. The audience loved it and we left.

Obviously the church is not responsible for every societal ill, and cannot cure everything. But I couldn't help but wonder how the discussion might have changed if the church had had a greater presence in the community toward persons with disability. I particularly wondered in a city like Redlands, where there seems to be a church on every corner.

"O man, He has declared to you what is good. And what does Jehovah require of you, but do do justice, and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with your God?" (Micah 6:8)

McNair

We must work the works: John 9:3-5

Nearly a year ago, I related the following in a blog entry:

John 9:3-5 says,
"Neither this man or his parents sinned" said Jesus, "but this happened so that the work of God might be displayed in his life. As long as it is day, we must do the work of him who sent me. Night is coming when no one can work" (NIV).

Jesus said this in response to his disciples asking about a blind man they encountered, "Who sinned, this man or his parents?" They were wondering who's sin caused the blindness.

Merril C. Tenney, the Bible scholar wrote that this passage might be translated in a different way. Here is Tenney's translation.
"Neither did this man sin, nor his parents" said Jesus. "But that the works of God should be made manifest in him, we must work the works of him that sent me, while it is still day; the night cometh when no man can work."

One of Tenney's points with his translation is that the works of God are made manifest in persons with disability by the things those around them do. The works of God were not made manifest solely through the healing of the man by Jesus. An interesting perspective to consider. An interesting plumb line for evaluating the response of the Church to persons with a variety of disabilities.

This morning, Kathi and I had the pleasure of having coffee with some friends who are parents of a daughter with down syndrome. They related the story of how their daughter will engage in a game of "keep away" with a couple of boys in the neighborhood. Invariably, the game becomes those two boys keeping the ball away from their daughter until the game finally ends. Independent of whether or not the gal with the disability recognizes that she is being taken advantage of in the game, it is obvious that those two boys are not working "the works of him that sent me while it is still day." Now its not that the boys are being particularly evil or something, but they certainly are not being kind to the girl. Working "the works of him that sent me" would probably look a lot less competitive in this case (I have nothing against competition), and reflect, I don't know, fairness, encouragement; evidences of works of God.

People with disability in our midst, provide us the opportunity to work the works of God. Don't hear me wrong. They are not in existence so that I might gain some brownie points with God. That would belittle the importance of their lives and accentuate the importance of my life. I see no evidence from scripture that I am to do either. However, as with the opportunity to help any person who needs it, the chance is provided to work the works of God. At times I will work the works and at other times I will receive the benefit of someone else working the works. The take home lesson, I believe, is that we are all surrounded by opportunities to serve others and we need to take advantage of those opportunities. We are all equal before God.

In response to a letter about his Lord of the Rings, J.R.R. Tolkien penned the following,

Frodo indeed ‘failed’ as a hero, as conceived by simple minds: he did not endure to
the end; he gave in, ratted. I do not say ‘simple minds’ with contempt: they often see with clarity the simple truth and the absolute ideal to which effort must be directed, even if it is unattainable. there weakness, however, is twofold. They do not perceive the complexity of any given situation in Time, in which an absolute ideal is enmeshed. They tend to forget that strange element in the World that we call Pity or Mercy, which is also an absolute requirement in moral judgment (since it is present in the Divine nature). In its highest exercise it belongs to God (emphasis added) (From Carpenter & Tolkien (1981), The Letters of J.R.R. Tolkien, #246, pp. 326)

There is a depth to the situations of my life. I may not be attending to the depth but it is there nonetheless.


McNair

I don't need you

Think about what has been happening in the Schaivo case as it relates to other persons with disability whose lives might be determined unworthy of continuance due to a quality of life determination. Paul wrote,

The eye cannot say to the hand, "I don't need you!" And the head cannot say to the feet, "I don't need you!" On the contrary, those parts of the body that seem to be weaker are indispensable, and the parts that we think are less honorable we treat with special honor. And the parts that are unpresentable are treated with special modesty, while our presentable parts need no special treatment. But God has combined the members of the body and has given greater honor to the parts that lacked it, so that there should be no division in the body, but that its parts should have equal concern for each other. If one part suffers, every part suffers with it; if one part is honored, every part rejoices with it. Now, you are the body of Chirst and each one of you is a part of it (1 Corinthians 12:21-27).

How often in the church, the household of faith, the body of Christ, do we turn to our neighbor and say, "I don't need you!" Our neighbors are defined as people who "seem to be weaker." Interesting caviat. They "seem" to be weaker for whatever reason, however, the Bible indicates that somehow these persons are "indispensable." It would appear to me that they are weaker, justifying my statement, "I don't need you!" but in actuality, they are "indispensable." It also says that the parts that "we think" are "less honorable we treat with special honor." Another caviat in the statement "we think," the implication being that although we think them less honorable, they are to be treated with special honor. God has "given greater honor to the parts that lacked it so there can be" get this, "no division in the body, but that its parts should have equal concern for each other." No division, equal concern. Equal concern about or for what? It would seem equal concern at the most basic level for life.

In the Schaivo case, they have music playing, flowers around her and a stuffed animal in her arm, but they are starving and dehydrating her to death. Is this having "equal concern for each other?" Who are we comforting with these amenities? Supposedly the woman's life is being taken because she is in a persistant vegetative state and would not appreciate such things. Please, if there is any notion that these things are comforting to her, reinsert the tube as she has the ability to appreciate music and beauty!

It occurs to me, that the church has for so long excluded people with disabilities that it has less problem than it perhaps should when a disabled person is starved to death. Or even if it has concern, it seems hollow in light of its lack of effort to include persons with disability prior to the point of life sustaining measures for a brain damaged person. If the church truly has concern for such individuals, why aren't there more brain damaged persons going to church? A pastor friend of mine has said that for a church to have a ministry that includes persons with down syndrome for example (as that is the form of disability most often tested for via amniocentesis in efforts at "prevention" of mental retardation leading to abortion), we give teeth to our arguments against abortion. We say, "Don't abort those children and bring them here, to our church to become a part of our church family, after they are born."

But I don't see as many persons with down syndrome attending church as are represented in the community. Instead, I hear horror stories of churches discriminating against persons with down syndrome and other disabilities and their families.

The church is a part of the problem in this whole issue. Disability has been constructed by the church in such a way that we feel comfortable saying to a disabled person "we don't need you." I look at this incident and am concerned, but I look at what might be the result of 2000 years of the church's lack of concern and am really concerned for what the future may hold.

Would we as Christians even miss, would we even know they were gone, if persons with mental retardation, for example, were systematically starved to death? We see Ms. Schiavo being starved to death and we become greatly concerned about the life of a person with a severe disability. But our track record says that really, as a whole Christian church, we don't seem to give a damn about persons with disability.

Like participants in a liturgy, we stand before the Lord, and tell those with severe disabilities who are not in our midst, "WE DON'T NEED YOU!" That is, until we are confronted with the natural results of our indifference.

McNair
(from cbu)

What to make of current events

I must admit that the recent events regarding taking the life of a severely disabled person concern me. However, it isn't just the events regarding the woman in Florida, it is also the discussion which surrounds her life and the battles of those around her. For example, this morning a bioethicist spoke of how the practice of removing a feeding tube occurred commonly across the country. He specifically referenced it happening to aborted infants who were born alive and children born with down syndrome. If you recall, the starving of children with down syndrome was an issue during the Reagan administration with the whole baby doe affair. I am aghast to think that our medical profession does such things.

Now I recognize that people should have a right to determine whether or not extensive efforts should be made to keep someone alive, particularly someone who has specifically requested that such efforts should not be used. However, feeding someone has now become included in extensive efforts. People are also permitted to make decision about others by caviat, without any documented permission given.

When people have lived life without the experience of the differences referred to as disability, they think they know how they would respond should they at some point experience disability. However, that is like trying to think about what it would be like to be a cat when you have been a dog all of your life. You think you know what you would do as a cat, but you really don't know, and you may find that your will to live as a cat is much more than you ever expected when you were still a dog.

Another concern to me is where these decisions about the life of another will go. If I have a severe disability, do I have a poor quality of life when the quality of life I have is the only one I have ever known? Can I look at a person in desperate poverty and say that they have a poor quality of life? Can I look at a person with down syndrome and say they have a poor quality of life? I have gone out of my way to ask quality of life questions to persons with disability, and almost without fail the response is that they feel they have a good quality of life. I have also at other times in this blog referred to the interview Christopher Nance did with Ray Charles. Nance asked, "What is it like to be blind?" Charles' wise response was, "What is it like to not be blind?" Quality of life is in the eye of the person having the life experience. . .not those observing the person.

We must be very careful about projecting our perspectives of poor life quality on others who may not agree with our point of view, or may agree at one point and not at another. Joni Eareckson relates the story of how she would have said that she wouldn't have wanted to live with the differences she now faces prior to the accident that changed her. However, now having become accustomed to her life, she feels she has a good quality of life.

So, although I don't want to get into people's business when such decisions are on the line, I am very worried that our laws allow for starving another to death on the basis of subjective notions of disability and quality of life. Persons with severe disability are easy targets.

McNair

Bottle necked pastors = layperson movement

I was asked to be on an advisory board for a disability advocacy group. It was interesting as yesterday, I met with the director and their idea is to develop lay people to influence the church. Lay people/leaders to open churches with disability programs. He said that the pastors of the churches can be the "bottle neck" in getting programs into churches for persons with disabilities. Wow.

But, you know, it makes sense that the exclusion of persons with disability has gone on for so long, that it is institutionalized to the point that pastors can be part of the problem. The church structures themselves, theology, leadership, and as a result rank and file members are the problem. I don't think we can rely on seminaries or Christian colleges (at least in their current form) to cause the changes that will result in churches being open to persons with disability. It might actually have to be a lay movement such as the one described by my lunch partner yesterday, that causes changes in the church.

Lets do it!

Interesting stuff to think about.

McNair
(from cbu)

Inclusive worship

I have often wondered about the concept of worship; what it is, how it is done, among other things. Recently questions about who can participate in worship enter my mind. In my church, worship seems very much performance oriented. The band plays loud, and the participation of the congregation is often hardly heard. Then the sermon is given and the expectation is quiet attention.

There are many people who cannot perform with the excellence that performance style worship requires so they would never be able to participate there. Even as audience members they can't sing because they can't read the projected words. They don't even clap in a very timely fashion. They are able to raise their hands and participate in other movements. During worship itself, they at times speak too loud, or ask for assistance in finding a Bible passage, or get up to use the restroom. They don't always look or dress like the rest of the congregation. They also sometimes don't smell like the rest of the congregation. As a result, they have at times been asked to not be a part of the congregation.

But the style of worship in many of todays churches which isso fragile, so excellent that it excludes those who are different belies something about the church. I would argue that if the style of worship is not inclusive of the range of people who would like to be involved in worship, then the style of worship needs to change. I don't recall where in scriptures that social skills are a requirement of worship participation. But I honestly believe that we have excluded persons with disability from the church for so long, that the traditional style of worship has grown to be one that excludes their participation in its very design.

McNair

Patronizing Good Will

Oftentimes when describing work with persons with disabilities, or even in introducing persons with cognitive disability to those without disability, I have the feeling that I am the recipient of a kind of patronizing good will. Whether it is based on some notion of political correctness in relation to the particular enviornment one is in, or a reflection of some general social etiquete of how one is to act or speak when the question of mental retardation arises, people move into this sentimental seriousness about persons with disability. Their speech belies good will of language on their part, but there is also a laziness about it. It's like they reverence the challenges of the families of those persons and what they suspect is the experience of the persons with disabilities themselves, however, they speak out of ignorance; a kind of lazy ignorance at that. Its like the response many special educators joke about that they receive when they say they are special educators. Without fail, others will respond, "You must have a lot of patience." Ask any special educator and he will report that he has heard that response.

It seems when confronted with disability, the general public is often so unfamiliar with persons with disability and their experiences that they respond with the pat answers, the patronizing replies which have been used over and over again. It is good will, but it is patronizing and unreflective of knowledge. But apparently they have heard others use those mindless replies and they appeared to sound heartfelt, kind and maybe even intelligent. So they repeat them as well. And so on and so on. In the end, we have social constructions reflected in the trite language used in response to the unknown of disability.

Now it is obviously better that the mindless responses of the general public should be patronizing good will over something negative, however, oftentimes the pat answers convey negativity which is just below the surface. I use positive speak in public environments about persons with disability, however, in private speak or when challenged to put the positive into practice (drop a group home in the neighborhood, for example) the positive is quickly replaced because the "due diligence" has not been done to actually support the positive.

So when confronted with trite, good speech about persons with disability, ask the questions that will cause the speaker to either back up the speech with actions, or at least go a bit deeper in his understanding of disability.

McNair

Make disability ministry a priority

I am aware of a ministry to adults with developmental disabilities that has been in existence for nearly 40 years. My wife, Kathi, and I were involved in the ministry for 5 years ourselves, nearly 20 years ago. Housed in a large church in Pasadena, California, the forward thinking woman who started the ministry is retiring from it, and as a result, it is at risk of no longer being in existence as no one, including the church leadership, has stepped forward to take her place.

At what point in the life of a ministry will a church embrace and adopt that ministry to the point of investing in it with resources, a pastoral position, etc.?

I wonder whether the ministry at my own church would survive if Kathi and I were no longer involved in it? This question about ministry survival goes to the heart of the church, the priorities of the church and what it is willing to invest in. Nearly any church will have singles ministry, and children's (non disabled children's) ministry, and ministries to singles and seniors. Very often there will also be pastoral positions linked to these ministries. The hiring of a pastor is a statement on behalf of the church that this area of ministry is a given, a priority. Such churches don't expect or depend exclusively on lay volunteers to make such ministries go. They don't wait for a lay person to step forward to make a commitment to the ministry before they will start it. The church leadership (pastors, elders, etc.) have decided that the particular area of ministry is a priority to them and they make it happen.

For example, my own church recently made the decision to commit resources to beginning a "Spanish language" ministry to persons living in the town who are largely Spanish speakers. They invested in buildings, hired staff, including a pastor, and have devoted significant energy to the project.

My question is not to doubt that the "Spanish language" project is worthy, but rather to ask why disability ministry is so often dependent upon lay people, and so infrequently an idea of the church leaders to be pursued as an important area for ministry development to the point of hiring staff to ensure it happens?

Can it actually be that after nearly 40 years of ministry, the Pasadena church will now refuse to support the ministry and ensure that it will continue? I can recall that there were many Sunday mornings where 60 or more developmentally disabled adults would participate in the church's activities. They lived in the apartments and group homes from all around Pasadena. Some folks we picked up, some rode the bus, and some were brought by their care providers. Very few were brought by church members, other than those working in the ministry.

Sometimes I think about going to a church other than the one I have attended for the past 14 years. Not that I am in some way dissatisified with my church. But more I wonder whether the 14 years that Kathi and I have invested in disability ministry there have made any difference in terms of the priority such ministry would have at the church if we were no longer there.

"Its too bad Kathi and Jeff left. We had a pretty good program going
on there for 14 years. Oh well . . ."

Church leaders, YOU should be taking the lead in ministries to persons with disability. YOU should ensure that such ministries are occurring at your church. Maybe put off your building program and hire a pastor to persons with disability instead. Make a statement to the community about the degree to which you are willing to go to serve others, rather than making another edifice to comfortable worship.

Earlier in this blog we discuss the Catholic Bishop statements. Statement number 9 (January 9)says,

"Our pastoral response is to become informed about disabilities and to offer
ongoing support to the family and welcome to the child."

At least the Bishops see the role of their clergy is the development of ministry, if only becoming knowledgeable about disability in order to offer support. It is a good starting point.

McNair

Preparing for acceptance

A light came on for me recently about the role of Christian special educators in the lives of persons with disabilities. As special educators, they are in the business of teaching students a variety of skills. These range from academic to social and other skills which will allow a person to be successful as an adult. But they also have another unique opportunity. They can work to soften the receiving environment, particularly the church, into which Christian children and hopefully others with disabilty will be received.

Those who work with adults, particularly those with developmental disabilities are constantly on the lookout for ways to successfully integrate these adults into the community. An important means for integration which I have advocated is the local church. Christian special educators, therefore, have the opportunity to work to develop skills in their students during the week, and soften the chruch environment persons with disabilities on the weekends. They can work both ends of the spectrum. As teachers, they also have the potential to provide the link to children with or without disabilities in their interactions with parents. They might suggest to parents that they study church programs in the area in order to see if that might be an avenue for the further inclusion of their children with disabilities. Teachers might even use some of the ideas I have written about (for example http://www.jeffmcnair.com/CSRD/localchurch.htm or http://www.jeffmcnair.com/CSRD/networks.htm ) as a way to introduce parents to the importance of networks in helping persons with disabilities to be integrated into the community.

However, in order to have sufficient receiving church networks which reflect the diversity of Christian denominations, it is incumbant on Christian special education teachers to work within their own church to soften it toward persons with disability. How does one soften an environment toward persons with disability? Well, you might start a little class for developmentally disabled adults on Sunday mornings. That's how my wife Kathi and I started at our church. Or, you might invite a student with disabilities to church and act as her buddy throughout the day as she moves through Sunday school classes or the worship service. Perhaps you ask your pastor if you can start a ministry where a group of people go to a group home once a month to play card games with the adults with disabilities who live there. Over time those folks might find there way to the church itself. I think an important part of changing someone or an organization like the church is keeping the issue in front of them. Over time they become more acclimated and they begin to soften. They see you interacting with a group of people and think, "that doesn't look to difficult" and then they give it a try themselves. Maybe you can even convince a music pastor to allow a person with disaibility who happens to be a good singer to sing before the congregation. Such structured opportunities to stare at the person with disabilties are very helpful in breaking down the stigma of the disability.

My wife and I have had great success in intereviewing adults with mental retardation before university classes that we teach. People who are even in special education teacher training programs say it is a "life changing" experience as they have never had that opportunity before (actually they have never taken the time to have that experience before). These types of interactions change the people who reflect the environment. If enough of the people are changed, the environment changes. A changed environment would be one which would be prepared to accept the students with disabilities that the special education teacher is training.

Without the efforts of special education teachers, case workers, and other Christian professionals working in areas of disability, the Church environment will not change and much of the efforts of special education teachers with their children will be in vain as there is no place in the community where adults with disability can be truly integrated.

So I have come to the point of thinking that a critical part of the work of a Christian special education teacher is to work in the environment of her own church. If we as Christians do the work we should do to prepare the environment, I guarantee that secularists will recognize the change and independent of their personal perspective on religiom, will on some level will have few options other than to send adults with disabilities to us, to the church because of the benefits the adults with disability are receiving: benefits that those who are secularist will be hard pressed to emulate in any environment other than a local church.

McNair (from cbu)

NACSPED Conference

This past Saturday, we held the first conference of NACSPED (the National Association of Christians in Special Education). The conference was held at California Baptist University in Riverside, California and by early reports was quite successful. A solid group of special education teachers, persons involved in ministry to persons with disability and parents attended. I was privileged to deliver the keynote presentation in which I outlined the goals of the organization. We will focus on working with the three groups of people listed above.

Conference presentations by others also highlighted one of the three areas. You are invited to visit http://nacsped.com to get a glimpse of the conference program. Shortly, we hope to have powerpoint presentations from the conference available at the website.

Next year's conference will also be held at California Baptist University, on March 11, 2006. For more information visit the webpage. We hope you will be able to join us next year.

McNair
(fcbu)

Christian social constructions

Are we a reflection of what social constructions say we are? At times we may desire to be a reflection of social constructions, at other times, not. For the Christian, we have been givein this archetype construction of who a person should be in the form of Jesus. Any Christian worth his salt will say that his greatest aspiration is to be like Jesus. The social construction of a "follower of Jesus" is something that was new at the time of Jesus, but has developed over time as Christians continue to grow in their understanding of who Jesus was and is. Douglas (1970) states that social construction theory explains a process whereby a reality is developed through the creation of knowledge. To the Christian, the reality is being a "Christ follower" which is built upon the knowledge which comes from revelation, wisdom and faith. If we truly understand this knowledge, we are able to look upon an individual and have some notion of how that individual lines up with the plumb line of "Christ follower."

There are those who would say that people are much more than a reflection of social constructions, whatever they may be, but for the Christian, the desire is to reflect the social construction in significant ways. For example, Jesus modeled ways in which a person would love his neighbor, love his enemy, and love and worship God. Christians themselves might mimic the ways in which Jesus prayed, by repeating the Lord's Prayer, making it their own. Christians might mimic Jesus' dedication by devoting daily time for prayer, Bible reading and reflection. Christians might also look at specific behaviors and language that Jesus used in reference to a particular life issue he confronted. For example, one might study Jesus' interactions with persons with disability in order to reflect the language and behaviors Jesus used in reference to persons with disability. The example of this interaction provides a knowledge set basic to a social construction of who persons with disability are, what disability is, and what the responsibilities of persons in the world toward both disability and those who have "disabilities." Jesus' life and teachings might be said to be the basis for a Christian social construction of disability.

For Christians, the degree to which they represent this social construction of disability, reflects the degree to which they emulate Jesus in this particular area of life. If they do not represent this social construction in this particular area, they do not represent Jesus. The Christian social construction is prescriptive in a slightly different way than the typical social constructions.
As we are socialized as people, we come to believe particular things about how the world works. Some notions are ingrained in our psyche. Every American child knows to "look both ways before crossing the street" or "don't pet a strange dog." But also built into that psyche deliberately or otherwise are "there but for the grace of God go I" or "don't stare" or "they can't help the way they are" or "they are God's special angels" or "they have a poor quality of life." These perceptions are communicated just as clearly as others although not perhaps as consciously.

For Christians, a whole series of behavioral social constructions are built into members of succeeding generations biologically and spiritually. Much of this "knowledge based reality" is indeed knowledge based. However, much of it is not and when examined shocks the person who had carried such a misperception all of his life.

I once went backpacking with some so-called friends. One of the group put a large rock in my backpack just before our decent down the mountain. Imagine my surprise to find that I had been carrying that rock for 8 miles. Upon recognizing that I had the rock in my pack, I promptly removed it and tossed it aside. We shouldn't press this metaphor too far, however, I was surprised because I had examined the things which found their way into the pack. I was surprised because something had gotten by my observation. In a life immersed in culture, we should not be surprised what notions, what ideas about reality, what social constructions fill our minds. It is only when we sit down and open our packs, when we engage in reflection in the light of what we know about our faith, that we see the incongruity of the rock in the backpack. But to recognize that a rock doesn't belong in a backpack, I need to know what does belong in a backpack. I don't throw out my dry socks, or my matches, but I definitely throw out the rock.

Over the centuries, Christians haven't been examining the contents of their backpacks, as least as they relate to persons with disability. If they had, they would have found that not only were they carrying rocks, they had neglected to pack dry socks and matches. How do we know this? It is because of the prescriptive nature of the Christian social construction of disability which points us to the knowledge which can be gained from studying the revelation of the life of Jesus, the wisdom which can be gained from life among people with "disability" and the understanding of one's own faith, who is invited to faith, and what the requirements of faith are.

Douglas, J.D. (1970). Understanding everyday life. In J.D. Douglas (Ed.), Understanding everyday life: Toward the resonstruciton of sociological knowledge (pp. 3-43). Chicago: Aldine.

McNair

More on "disabled" by design

I appreciated the thoughtful comments posted in reference to the last blog. It is interesting and I also think important to ask whether differences which our society has categorized as "disability" are examples of human variation or the result of "the fall." I will freely admit that I do not entirely understand what the answer is to that question. Observations I have made include those in the previous blog as well as others made at other times in months past in the blog. For example, is aging, and the degradation of the body the result of the fall? Are accidents like the one that caused me to blow out my ACL (anterior cruciate ligament) resulting in the bad knee I continue to have the result of the fall, or was there the possibility that someone could injure themselves to the point of having a bad knee pre fall?

As I said, I really am unsure, however, I am beginning to move in the direction of understanding differences called disabilities as a part of simple variations in the human race. When God says that his creation was "very good" does that mean that all of the human members of the creation were entirely equal in every way? At the very least, we know there were differences between men and women. At what point does a difference become a "disability?" History tells us that the number of persons labeled as disabled increased dramatically with the industrial revolution. That is, people who were within the "normal" range when all they had to do was have a strong back were now thought of as disabled in light of the demands of urban society. So one might ask, to what extent is "disability" a characteristic of an individual and to what extent is "disabilty" a reflection of the environment.

I recently saw the movie Ray about the life of Ray Charles. As I look at that movie, as I consider all that Mr. Charles achieved, I wonder at his "disability." In the range of visual ability, he was on the dark end of the scale, having lost his vision. So he had a severely diminished ability to perceive light. It is also true that he relied on persons in his environment to assist him throughout his life (as do I). But I kind of agree with his mother (as portrayed in the film) when she says something to the effect that "you cannot see, but don't become a cripple." Is the limited ability to see the result of the fall? I would think becoming a "cripple" is definately a result of the fall as it appears to reflect a lack of reliance on God, on oneself, and people. A person who is a "cripple" in the way that Ray Charles' mother implied is reflecting a negativity, a buying of the notion that one is less than created in the image of God. This notion is taught to a person, is pounded into a person by society and is society at its worst.

It has always struck me as ironic that people like me, who are largely within the normal range of ability levels, can look at our sin scarred selves with all the foibles and proclaim that we are created in God's image.

It also haunts me to come back to God's comment "who makes the dumb, or the deaf, or the seeing, or the blind." Does God purposely create "imperfection" or do I need to change my definitions?"

. . . don't know, still working through it.

McNair