"They'll know we are Christians by our lack of experience"

It struck me this week how inexperienced the average person who attends a church is about persons with disabilities. I know a wide variety of Christians at various stages in their spiritual development who attend various denominations within the larger Christian church, but I always am somewhat surprised about how little they have been around persons with disabilities of various types. Now I wouldn't necessarily have the same expectation of those outside of church, however, it occurs to me that the lack of experience, knowledge, interactions of Christians with persons with disabilities, rank and file Christians, is further evidence of the Church's lack of inclusion of persons with disabilities in local churches. Can you imagine having a church in the Greater Los Angeles Basin, where I live, and having no experience with people of Hispanic descent, or people who are primarily Spanish language speakers? Wouldn't you think it strange for people to recoil at people with that background when the region enjoys such a significant Hispanic population?

Yet the US census tells us that 20 percent of the population experiences a disability, but I can introduce a Christian person to someone with mental retardation and it is an entirely new experience.

As I have said elsewhere, we should be leading the way in reaching out to devalued people with love, and inclusion and respect, and service, but we have missed it somehow, and do not even think it strange that our experience in this area is so limited. It is an indictment on us as a Christian church that we lack experience with such individuals who should be in our midst on a regular basis, at least once a week you would think.

(fcbu)
McNair

NACSPED 2006

March 11, 2006 will be the second annual meeting of the National Association of Christians in Special Education. This year the meeting is once again being held at California Baptist University. We are blessed with an excellent group of presenters dealing with subjects ranging from state of the art special education, to ways to integrate persons with disabilities into the local church, to parents sharing their experiences of joy and frustration with state agencies and schools, and unfortunately the Christian church as well. It should be a great day! Check out the website at http://nacsped.com

I am going to try to rally the forces to continue pushing for a movement of lay professionals to change the church. We aren't doing half of what we might being doing if we made the effort. I was reminded of this this past week. A woman who attends our church who experiences a cognitive disability, moved from her residence in town to a group home in a neighboring community. In that community there are several very large, I mean VERY LARGE churches. I was contacted by the woman who runs the group home about information regarding our church as my friend wanted to continue coming to church. After providing the information I asked the woman whether there would be any others at the group home who would enjoy attending church. To make a long story short, we will hopefully have an additional 10-20 adults experiencing cognitive disability coming to our church.

I was in another neighboring community to pick up a friend at his workshop and was once again amazed as the adults experiencing cognitive disabiities filed out how few of them I knew. I pray that they have a church home somewhere. There are opportunities to reach out to individuals like these, many who are unchurched and would love to have a relationship with the Lord. However, we set our sights too low, and become satisfied with the status quo in our churches. We do some small thing and congratulate ourselves, when God gives us the opportunity to do great things through faith and obedience.

That is the part of this equation that is missing. I have done research myself about the number of churches in my region who have persons with developmental disabilties who attend. The result was 85% which is great! However, there were largely only 1 or 2 per church, and they were at the church because they just showed up at the doorstep of the church. Why aren't churches out looking for those individuals so they can minister to them and facilitate their sharing their gifts. Just based on the US census, there should about 20% of church membership comprised of persons with disabilties, with about 9% of that group having severe disabilities. Is 9% of your church's congregation comprised of persons with severe disabilties? If you have a church of 200, you might expect about 40 persons with disabilities to be in the congregation, 18 of which have severe disabilities. And, I will tell you, if they are not there, it is not because they do not want to come. They are most likely not there because they simply have not been asked.

May God bless us in our efforts to grow an army of lay professionals to change the church. With obedience will come blessing, I believe.

McNair
(fcbu)

Listening to the spirit of the world

A frequent respondent to this blog who contributes under the name "impossibleape" wrote the following (see February 22, 2006 entry).

Our church administrator told me today that if the Holy Spirit directs them to serve the disabled they will but apparently the Holy Spirit has no more interest in my children than the board members do.

You know, I am very skeptical or have become very skeptical of those who claim to have such a connection to the Holy Spirit that He frequently whispers in their ears, particularly when He whispers things which are contrary to the revealed Word of God in the form of the Bible. It appears to me that the spirit they are listening to is attempting to subvert the Word of God. It occurs to me that because the Holy Spirit inspired the word of God, maybe those who claim to be hearing his voice are rather reflecting the voice of someone else who is whispering in their ears. It could be the spirit of this world which is a scary thought. Actually I wonder if the spirit they are listening to is an even more debased spirit than others as the secular world has done much to include and integrate persons with disabilities, particularly in public schools.
In relation to the issues we discuss on this blog, there are too many churches, pastors, leaders, administrators of churches, etc. who are listeing to a spirit of the world. How could one truly be seeking to hear the Spirit of God on this issue and express no interest, no priority? How evil to blame our lack of caring and love on a lack of prompting by God's Holy Spirit? In other words they are saying, "It is the fault of the Spirit of God that I am not caring for persons with disabilities. It is not the desire of God's Spirit that I do so."

Matthew 12:31-32
31 "Therefore I say to you, any sin and blasphemy shall be forgiven men, but blasphemy against the Spirit shall not be forgiven.
32 "And whoever shall speak a word against the Son of Man, it shall be forgiven him; but whoever shall speak against the Holy Spirit, it shall not be forgiven him, either in this age, or in the {age} to come.
Mark 3:28-30
28 "Truly I say to you, all sins shall be forgiven the sons of men, and whatever blasphemies they utter;
29 but whoever blasphemes against the Holy Spirit never has forgiveness, but is guilty of an eternal sin"--
Luke 12:10
10 "And everyone who will speak a word against the Son of Man, it shall be forgiven him; but he who blasphemes against the Holy Spirit, it shall not be forgiven him.

Sure each of us are prompted in various ways to minister and to use our gifts in different ways. However, we are talking about an agent of the Church. The Church with a capital "C" that is saying it has not been guided by the Holy Spirit to respond to a group of potentially hurting people who are in need. I don't know who these leaders think people experiencing disabilities are or where they came from. That perhaps they fall from the sky, or crawl from under a rock. NO, they are parts of families and as the church ministers to families it needs to minister to all the members of the family. The Bible says we are to minister to those who are poor. Do a need a sign from God, or the Holy Spirit to speak to me in an audible voice to minister to the poor when the Bible is replete with allusions to me helping the poor? If a church leader told you that he hadn't received the prompting of the Holy Spirit to minister to the poor, what could you think other than that he is out of touch with God's Word and God's Spirit? If he said God Spirit hadn't directed him to share salvation with all people, only some, what would you think?

No, lets call this what it is. It is disobedience.

(fcbu)
McNair

"We'll take you and not you"

I was hit today with something quite obvious, but I hadn't thought about it in this way before. It struck me that churches/pastors will at times say that ministry to persons experiencing disabilities is not a particular priority. We have probably all heard that at one time or another in the past. But the obvious thing that hit me again today was that I (as a church, pastor, etc.) will look at your family, a family that includes a person experiencing disability and say, "Ministry to you, the person over there experiencing disability, is not a priority for our church." It is not like we are saying ministry to white or black or brown or other entire groups of people is not a priority. We are looking within families and saying that these individuals in your family are a priority for ministry and those others are not a priority for ministry. I first observed this with Christian schools who can be notorious for not serving students who would benefit from special education. But it is even broader than that, actually separating families by prioritizing some members of the family over others.

It also struck me that the ones we don't choose to serve are potentially the more difficult ones to serve because they don't fit the way in which we have designed services, designed ministry. The classic example for me which illustrates this point is the church who wouldn't allow a high school student who used a wheel chair to be a member of the youth group because the youth group met on the second floor of a building with no elevator. So rather than design services which meet on the first floor, or develop access to the second floor, we choose not to include those who do not fit our designed ministries.

It is interesting that the Department of Rehabilitation used to have a criteria, I guess still does, for receiving services. The criteria was that you had to be able to "benefit from services." So if you needed services for an extended period of time or forever for that matter, you were deemed ineligible because you couldn't benefit from services. You could potentially benefit from services, just not those provided. Ultimately through the novel thinking of Madelline Will, the past Assistant Secretary of Special Education for the federal government, the definition of services to include ongoing services opened up the Department of Rehabilitation to those who could benefit from services over the long term. The people didn't change, the criteria for delivery of services and the types of services provided were changed.

This is a change that needs to find its way into the church. There are those who would argue that people experiencing disability cannot be integrated in to existing church programs. This excuse is used as a reason for exclusion. In my mind, the answer is not exclusion, it is the redesign of services such that those who might be able to benefit would indeed benefit. Don't tell me that you will not serve people because they don't fit your structures, change your freakin structures. A discriminatory church which has been in a discriminatory rut for perhaps over a century will not change easily, but it is not the people who have the problem, it is the discriminatory church that needs to change.

This is hard coming because it requires a great deal of courage on the part of the leadership, and that courage is not as prevalent as I wish it would be. Ministry is hard and it is about time that the rank and file church attender learned that. Rather than dodging the difficult issues of ministry for fear of making attenders uncomfortable, we should be saying "We choose to include people experiencing disability, and it will make us change the comfortable ways we have been doing things to date." I wonder how many rank and file church members think ministry is easy, because they haven't been challenged to do it. I wonder how many would embrace the changes that would be required to truly include all of the people who would desire to attend church and participate in the programs of the church.

McNair
(fcbu)

Jeremiah 29:11

For I know the plans I have for you, declares the LORD, plans to prosper you and not to harm you, plans to give you hope and a future.

Those were the words of God to the exiles. People who felt abandoned and displaced, by and large by no fault of their own. I believe the Lord wanted to encourage those people by promising them a future. He also had plans "not to harm you" which was something perhaps that they were unsure of because of their life experience to date. He wants to give us hope (which is given through Jesus) and a future. I see people with disabilities in this verse. It seems a word of reassurance to those who might not be entirely sure of what God is up to on the basis of their experience.

As is typical, in His kindness God knows of our wavering trust and gives us a shot of confidence and hope. How could one be more encouraging than to say, "you have a future" and "I have plans for you" and "I have plans to prosper you."

This verse has been an encouragement to me and I don't face the issues of disability, personally, that many face. I hope those who are feeling overwhelmed by their disability or the discriminatory effects of their disability will find a "hope and a future" in this passage.

McNair
(fcbu)

"Yes Virginia, there is a Santa Clause"

I was recently talking with some colleagues about how there are many apocryphal stories floating around, and have been for years, which embrace an unjustifiable spirituality about who people with disabilties are or are not. By unjustifiable, I mean from a Christian perspective based upon the Biblical narrative. I focus my comments on Christians, who claim to believe the message and narrative of Christianity, and then cling to unjustifiable spiritual claims. In being critical of these stories, a friend disagreed saying that the stories were comforting and encouraging to he and his family at the birth of their family member with disability.

No doubt, that those who create such stories are probably motivated by the thought of being encouraging to the parents and families of persons with disabilities, but I would rather hear the truth. Please don't tell me that there is an Easter Bunny no matter how good it makes me feel, if there really isn't one (there isn't is there?). Also, don't tell someone that their child with down syndrome is an angel, because I know that he is just a person like me. Don't tell me that he has something special to do, unless you are telling all the other children the same thing, because we all are unique and all therefore have special things that we alone can do. But those with disability are not any more special than anyone else. They are just people. They are not heroes, or angels, or devils, or object lessons for the nondisabled. They are not demons, or sub-human animals, or to be considered objects of dread or pity, or holy innocents (see Normalization by Wolfensberger), or any other notion you might come up with other than that they are people.

Now, some may do heroic things or angelic kinds of things or even evil kinds of things, but that is because they are people like you and me and we sometimes do heroic things and angelic things and evil things.

So it may make you feel nice to think that there is a Santa Clause, but there is no Santa Clause. We jokingly tell our children that they will get nothing from Santa Clause this year, nor have they gotten anything from Santa Clause ever. To say otherwise, particularly to a child, is an untruth...an untruth perhaps shared out of kindness, but an untruth nonetheless.

But we are not dealing with children when we are attempting to answer the questions of parents, adults, who have had a child with disability born into their family. Yet we must also clearly understand what the truth is so we can share it accurately. That is where church leaders need to step up to the plate so that Christians are not misinformed. But then, I wonder what percentage of church leaders know the truth in this area? I wonder how many churches will advertise that next week's sermon topic is, "Yes Virginia, there is a Santa Clause?"

McNair
(fcbu)

A "replacement narrative"

A friend and colleague of mine, Arthur Seale and I have been in discussion about the notion of a replacement narrative. That is, a story, a narrative to replace the one which guides people socially in their day to day lives. For the Christian, the replacement narrative is what she/he learns from the Bible. The teachings of the Bible are prescriptive social constructions which in many ways replace the social constructions we were raised to believe by our society. For example, we might have been taught as a child that if someone hits you you hit him back. The biblical replacement narrative would perhaps say you should turn the other cheek.

This notion of a replacement narrative really came home to me this past weekend as our pastor discussed Romans 12. The passage says,

Do not conform any longer to the pattern of this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind. (Romans 12:2)

I wondered about this in terms of the narrative the church is currently working under relative to persons with disabilities. I hate to say it, but in many ways, the society reflects more of a biblical construction of disability than the church does. However, generally we do have a lot to offer the world, and we must not conform to the patterns of this world but renew our minds.

To what extent does the church reflect or contribute to negative social constructions of persons with disabilities, and, I would argue move away from a truly biblical narrative about who people with disabilities are and Christians and the Christian church's responsibility towards them? I even wonder at times whether the church knows what the biblical replacement narrative about disability is.

Anyway, that is what Arthur and I are chewing on. Your input is invited.

McNair
(fcbu)

Rev. Dennis Kingsland

A co-laborer with us in working to open churches to persons with disability died this past week. I only knew Rev. Dennis Kingsland for a few years, and unfortunatley, only in contexts of working toward changing the church in areas of disability ministry. Dennis headed up the Inland Empire (Southern California) advisory board for Joni and Friends of which I am a part. He was passionate about people with disabilities and passionate about seeing people gain faith and understanding of the Lord.

The image which was repeated at his memorial service yesterday, was that Dennis was like the horse in the starting gate, struggling to get moving, desparate to go forward. As the disease which ultimately took his life progressed, he was debilitated, but was always saying that "I wish I could do more." He would even apologize for his health condition to those around him, because he wished, like the horse in the starting gate, he could bust out and really push ahead.

I will never forget a conversation I once had with him on the campus of Cal Baptist University. We were talking about some of the impediments to churches moving forward. Dennis as a pastor himself, founder of a church, leader in his denomination, and pastor emeritas told me that pastors are often the bottleneck in opening churches to persons with disabilities. Although I guess I already knew that, to hear it from a pastor of his stature was a revelation to me. Based on that conversation, I came away realizing that at least in the short term, changes in the church are probably not going to come from the leadership of the church. We needed a movement of lay professionals to come in and challenge the discrimination which occurs in the church. We particularly needed people in special education who are also Christians. Based on that conversation, I began to ruminate about what I could do to facilitate the development that movement of lay professionals. Ultimately myself and others came up with the professional organization we started called the National Association of Christians in Special Education. When this organization was birthed a little over a year ago, I remember Dennis being enthused about the idea. It was a way to potentially break open the bottle neck and move the church on a path which should have been a 4 lane highway by this point in time.

On a personal note, Dennis was always very encouraging to me personally. Have you ever met someone where you felt you had their favor? Dennis never did anything specific for me other than stimulate my thinking, and listen to me, but I felt as I was one of his favorite people (I suspect there are hundreds of people whom he made to feel that way). That is another thing that I will always remember about him. That is also something I hope I can emulate about his life as well. To be with someone and to feel like you are loved by him or her, that you have their favor must have been what it was like to be with Jesus himself, which, by the way is where Dennis is today.

McNair
(fcbu)

Why healing?

When you think about why there might be persons who experience disability in the world, typically you come up with two types of responses. The one states that people are disabled by design. That is, God made them that way. It is the "who made man's mouth" argument that God gives to Moses when he doesn't want to lead because of his apparent poor speaking ability. The other side is the perspective that along with disease and death, disability entered the world at the time of the Fall of man. Prior to that time, there would be no disabilty, by design or otherwise. One wonders about the range of creativity God might have used at that point in areas like memory and other aspects of cognitive functioning to the point of a level of functioning being what one might call a disability.

Anyway, the question which I have been considering lately, is that if God created people with disabilities by His design, that is He made them that way, why would Jesus go to the trouble of healing many of those who came into His life? If they were disabled by design, and that was just another creative aspect of the creation, he might as well as changed the hair color of the Middle Eastern people from black to blonde, or their ethnicity from Middle Eastern to Caucasian.. If disability is a natural part of God's creation by design, why heal? God didn't heal Moses' mouth.

Somebody smarter than me needs to wrestle with these issues to provide a greater understanding of disability.

Anyway, something to think about.

McNair
(fcbu)

"decisions to continue or terminate are never medical decisions"

I recently reacquainted myself with an article by Roberts, Stough and Parish, written in 2002 entitled, The Role of Genetic Counseling in the Elective Termination of Pregnancies Involving Fetuses with Disabilities (published in the Journal of Special Education). I want to give you a few quotes from the article, interspersed with some of my comments. The authors state,

“most prospective parents seem to consider Down syndrome as involving severe mental retardation. In actuality, 90% of all individuals with Down syndrome fall within the mild to moderate range of fuctioning.”

The perception of who persons with Down syndrome are, has been one of the greatest misperceptions. It has taken on the status of "common sense" as social constructions often do. It has been reported that nearly 90% of babies with Down syndrome, when diagnosed prenatally, are aborted.

“A woman’s intention to terminate or continue a pregnancy did not appear related to her overall level of knowledge about disabilities…as the level of knowledge increased, the choice to continue the pregnancy was more likely…The women were asked if they had been encouraged to meet with the parent of a child with a disability during the prenatal screening process. The majority of women (91.3%) indicated that they had not been encouraged to meet with a parent by either the genetic counselor or any medical personnel”

Medical professionals and geneticists in particular I would bet have little knowledge about the day to day lives of persons with a variety of disabilities, including persons with Down syndrome. Yet they are in the position of influencing vulnerable families about decisions relative to aborting children with Down syndrome. I have mentioned elsewhere in this blog that the only suffering most people with Down syndrome face is that of discrimination (beginning with the medical profession at the point of prenatal diagnosis). To address the societal discrimination persons with Down syndrome face, with medical alternatives is entirely inappropriate. The group who is discriminated against avoids discrimination by having their lives taken, not by changing the society.

The article, also indicated that 72 % of participants had some Christian affiliation, yet 0%, NONE, NO ONE, reported the church as one of the “Sources of information women viewed as helpful during the genetic screening process.” In 87% of cases, “doctor recommended” was most often the influence in seeking genetic counseling. Can you imagine if the church celebrated loved and accepted people with Down syndrome? Prenatal diagnosis would signify not a terrible tradgedy with the only seeming alternative being abortion, but a new opportunity, a new adventure for the family. In particular, if the church were there being supportive, understanding, it would be a great blessing not only for the family but also for the church and the larger community.

“A woman’s intention to terminate or continue a pregnancy did not appear related to her overall level of knowledge about disabilities…as the level of knowledge increased, the choice to continue the pregnancy was more likely…The women were asked if they had been encouraged to meet with the parent of a child with a disability during the prenatal screening process. The majority of women (91.3%) indicated that they had not been encouraged to meet with a parent by either the genetic counselor or any medical personnel”

Such suggestions to seek out knowledge are probably not going to come from institutions who support abortion of any child as an aspect of choice, particularly a child with Down syndrome. But what if individuals with Down syndrome and other disabilities were present in the church in numbers reflective of the community. What if parents and family members of persons with disabilities were known to people in the church. Would that have in any way stemmed the decision to abort because the “level of knowledge” had increased.

“Women who had knowledge of resources and programs that assist with the education, training, and care of a child with a disability were more likely to consider continuing the pregnancy. It may be that as women become more informed about the associations, agencies, and individuals available to assist people with disabilities, they start to view the task of raising a child with a disability as less overwhelming.”

What programs is the local church providing generically, that are present in all churches, that would in any way cause prospective parents of a child with Down syndrome to consider continuing the pregnancy? This article never mentions churches as any kind of attenuating agent in the decision making of prospective parents. Can you imagine if all of the Christian prospective parents in the study stated, "We are going to keep our baby with Down syndrome because of the way the people with disabilities and their families are enfolded and celebrated within the Christian church."

“However, most women reported that they did not receive information about disability resources or quality-of-life issues from their genetic counselors. In addition, they did not believe that their counselor presented them with both the positive and the negative aspects of having a child with disabilities. This finding suggests that pregnant women make decisions based on limited information even after participating in genetic counseling."

Where would someone go to gain such information? What if the church became a clearinghouse for programs and services which would paint disability in a positive light? God asked Moses, "Who makes man's mouth" in response to his complaint about his inability to speak. It is arguable that God makes persons with Down syndrome. We as a church, however, don't seem quite as happy about that fact as we might be. We have failed in celebrating the diversity of humanity to the point that prospective mothers would perhaps reconsider abortion of a child with Down syndrome. What information, experience does the church provide about persons with disabilities and their place in the church and the larger society? People are dying because people think they will have a poor quality of life. How does the church contribute to the perception of someone having a good or poor quality of life?
The article cites Rothman (1993), as making the following statement:

“decisions to continue or terminate a pregnancy are never medical decision. They are always social decisions”(Rothman, 1993, p. 63)

Does the society of the Church contribute positively or negatively to the social decision making of people? Whether they are Christian or not, how does what we, the Church do, to influence decisions about whether to abort or not abort a child with a disability?


McNair

Down syndrome music video

I have an idea for a music video which I am happy to share with any interested rock band. Here goes...

The video begins moving between scenes showing 10 different persons with down syndrome engaging in various activities typical to their lives. So for example
1- Girl eating popcorn and watching TV
2- A young man coloring in a spiderman coloring book
3- An adult man really enjoying a burrito
4- A woman holding and rocking a baby on her lap
5- A woman working at a sorting task in a sheltered workshop
6- A man sitting at a baseball game in team attire enjoying a game
7- A baby lying in a crib drinking from a bottle
8- A man bowing his head in prayer at a grave site while others walk by
9 + 10- A couple giving each other a kiss sitting on a bench in a park

The camera jumps between these people enjoying regular lives, perhaps fading in and out with close ups on faces so there is no doubt that the people have down syndrome.

Then out of nowhere, two people come in and grab the girl watching the TV and take her down into a basement where they hastily lock her in a room, fade to black. The coloring book is taken and the screen fades to black. The burrito drops from the hand and falls to the plate, fade to black. The baby is taken gruffly from the girl who looks up sadly, fade to black. The camera pans through the workshop which is empty, fade to black. The seat at the baseball game is empty, an obviously pregnant woman comes and takes the seat, fade to black. The same grave site appears, but no one is praying, people just walking by. The couple are separated gruffly fade to black. The crib stands alone for what seems an eternity. As the screen begins to fade out, text come up which says, "90% of people with down syndrome are diagnosed prenatally and their lives terminated." The picture then comes back and almost suddenly, a baby with down syndrome is laid in the crib fade to white.

McNair

Moses and his mouth

One of my students provided me with an interesting perspective on the passage in Exodus 4:10 (LITV). The passage states,

And Moses said to Jehovah, O Lord, I am not a man of words, either from yesterday or the third day, nor since You have been speaking to Your bondslave. For I am heavy of mouth and heavy of tongue. And Jehovah said to him, "Who has made man's mouth? Or who makes the dumb, or the deaf, or the seeing, or the blind? Is it not I, Jehovah?"

There are many conclusions which might be drawn about who people with disability are, not the least of which is that they are made by Jehovah. However, I found it interesting that God comes to Moses, a man who it appears both Moses and God agreed had some form of a speech impediment, and asks him (Moses) to speak for Him (Jehovah). God goes to a person with a disability and challenges him in the area of his disability. Later in verse 15 the passage says,

And you shall speak to him, and you shall put the words in his mouth. And I will be with your mouth, and with his mouth, and I will teach you what you shall do.

Other than noting that God is a special educator, He is consistent in providing people to come alongside of persons with disabilities so that they can move beyond themselves. No doubt in addition to looking for an excuse to not do what God wanted him to do, Moses had defined himself as this person with a speech problem. He was probably teased as a child, felt uncomfortable around women, and all the other things which accompany such a disability. But God didn't see him in that way.
Moses also must have either known that God made him the way he was, or perhaps he wasn't sure and was wondering how God would respond to his complaint about his disability. God, however, leaves him no doubt. "Who has made man's mouth?" Now apparently, God didn't make just one mouth, but a variety of mouths, as he recognizes that Aaron's mouth does not face the same issues as Moses' mouth. It appears that Moses' mouth and Aaron's mouth are simply within the range of mouths God made.
However, the point I wanted to make here is to those who might read this blog who experience a disability. God may choose to challenge you in the area of your disability. This doesn't surprise me as it is a scriptural principle that God works through weakness such that His glory might be seen. Perhaps disability is an opportunity for the Christian who experiences disability. It is a chance to show God's glory through weakness. It is also an opportunity for those around that person with disability to also demonstrate God's glory by "working the works of Him who sent me(see 4/1/2005 blog entry).

McNair
(fcbu)

The ultimate in discrimination

My friend and colleague, Rev. Bill Gaventa recently recommended a book to me and I am glad he did. It is, Hans S. Reinders' The future of the disabled in a liberal society: An ethical analysis (Notre Dame Press). I am only about half way through it, but I have thoroughly enjoyed what I have read thus far. For those of you who do not like to read philosophy, it is a bit thick, but it is definitely worth the effort. I want to provide an extended quote from page 46.

The context is the attempt to try to understand the reasons for abortion of children with disabilties in the context of "prevention" of genetic disorders.

The aim of the proposed terminology is to suggest that, in principle, we can attack the consequences of a disease from two sides: not only by combatting the disease with the diagnostic and therapeutic means that medicine provides but also by changing the social and cultural environment that makes for the cause of disability or handicap. The latter may be the objective of social and political reform rather than of medical intervention. The distinction between types of genetic disorders is important, then, because it generates different moral arguments. Preventing the birth of a disabled child because its life will be devalued as abnormal is surely morally different from preventing the birth of a disabled child that will suffer from serious illness. Even if in both cases their lives may be burdened by distress to similar degrees, their distress is very different in kind. Furthermore, being devalued as abnormal in our society may be seen as constituting a case of discrimination, which means that prevention in that case takes on a completely different meaning. For it can be argued, given these different meanings, that in some cases prevention is a dubious response to a social evil. At least that is what I think many people in our society will be lieve to be true. Instead of confronting the agents of discrimination, one aims at preventing its victims from being born. Consequently, people in our society may be worried about preventing disabled children for reasons of abnormality, even if at the same time they may accept that parents decide not to have a mentally disabled child in order to avoid serious suffering due to illness. If the cause of the suffering is society rather than nature, the more appropriate response would be political rather than medical. This indicates in which sense disabilities and handicaps caused by different kinds of genetic disorders may raise different sets of moral questions. (emphasis added)

Reading this, I can't help but come back to the notion of the church's protective function. We have the ability to provide succor with the potential effect of normalizing the lives and experience of persons with disability. Or by chosing to ignore or not prioritize ministry to persons with disability, we can be complicit in the discrimination which leads to practices such as abortion of such people. As Reinders states, the solution to aleviating the suffering of a significant group of persons with genetic disorders/disabilities is of a political or social nature. If the church would normalize persons with down syndrome, for example, the arguments for prevention of these lives through abortion would be harder to substantiate. We would also be all that we should be to the community, potentially having a dramatic effect on the understanding of who people with down syndrome are. People would have to say that persons with down syndrome suffer from discrimination, but only in environments outside of the Christian world. Within the Church and its agents, they are just people.

McNair
(fcbu)

disabled Body of Christ

A student in one of my classes recently shared the passage from Corinthians about the Body of Christ. The passage states,

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).

We touched on this passage back on March 30th. However, thinking through the notion of the body again, and even the title of this weblog, it occurred to me that we are a disabled body. The Body of Christ is a disabled body. Why is that? I would argue it is because we have selectively not included or even have cut off parts of the body, people with disabilities who would desire to be participants in the Body of Christ. It is as if we as the Church (using the Body of Christ metaphor) are limping around without a foot, or are seeing with only one eye or are missing the fingers of one hand. In the same manner that a person might become used to a missing aspect of their anatomy, the Church has become used to functioning without all of the members of it's body. It would be interesting to try to determine whether there was a point in the life of the Church when we actually 'cut off' that part of the body, or whether it was in some way 'born' without all their body parts. To push the metaphor further, the Church might not know what it is to walk with two feet or see with both eyes or have a hand with all of the fingers intact. That is what I have alluded to in the past in this weblog regarding that we really don't know what the Church could be if we included all of those who would choose to participate. We have grown used to being a disabled Body of Christ, grown used to being an incomplete body.

Can you imagine cutting off your foot because it wasn't a priority to have it as a part of your body? Can you imagine thinking, "I will get by with one eye because it will be too expensive to try to live with two eyes." To me, that is what we as the Church are doing. We are by choice deciding to be a disabled Body of Christ that does not include all of the parts.

McNair
(fcbu)

Complicity: the state of being an accomplice, as in a wrongdoing

That is the way The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language defines the word complicity. In atrocities, in discriminations, in poor treatment of the past the word might be used to describe the church. We look back on those times of complicity in the past and wonder how the church could have been so blind as to have missed the great evil, the significant injustice it was participating in at the time.

We congratulate ourselves at the fact that "we would not have let that evil happen!"
I have often wondered what the blindspot of the church is today. What is the evil we are overlooking which we might stand up against? I think I might have the answer.

As I described in the last blog entry, there is great excitement that doctors may now be able to identify up to 90% of persons with down syndrome prenatally, and do it earlier. They claim this will save mothers the embarassment of being detected as pregnant or the psychological dissonance of having felt the first kicks of the baby before killing it. Church people, leaders included, are often so oblivious about who persons with down syndrome are that they cannot even engage in a discussion. As a result, they mourn the birth of a child with down syndrome in the same manner as someone without knowledge. Down syndrome is an unknown to them, though it needn't be, so they fear it, perhaps even fear those with the disability. But if those people were in churches, we might not only loose our fear, we might learn to see them as a blessing. I can tell you that I do!

I am not the parent of such a person although I would not fear being such a parent. I don't know how many people with down syndrome I have known, maybe 50, not a lot of people but I certainly don't fear them or their differences. I have actually come to love them and am drawn to them. They are sweet, decent people who enjoy life. They will rejoice or mourn with you with heartfelt empathy. They will go to school, maybe get a job, and live on their own or with limited support. You wouldn't have to try very hard to convince me that a great sense of humor is a characteristic of the syndrome. However, we, the church, fear what we don't understand, and are too damned lazy to find out what it is that we fear. If we did take the time, our perspectives would change.

The degree to which the church has not participated in dispelling falsehoods and telling the truth,
the degree to which the church stigmatizes and excludes people from the typical programs of the church,
the degree to which the church says that such people are not a priority for ministry to the point of putting it into their budgets,
the degree to which the church doesn't go out of its way to bring people with down syndrome into its fellowship,
the degree to which national church leaders are not speaking out against the evil of prenatal diagnosis and abortion of children with down syndrome,
is the degree to which we are complicit in this evil.
We are complicit in this evil.

The good news is that God is a forgiving God. He is forgiving if we denounce our complicity and repent. It starts with you (as trite as it sounds).

McNair (fcbu)

Down Syndrome Genocide

In a fascinating article, the National Review discusses an article in the Washington Post entitled, "Down Syndrome Now Detectable In 1st Trimester: Earlier Diagnosis Allows More Time for Decisions." Couching the issue of prenatal diagnosis and abortion as a women's health issue, the article states, "This is a big deal for women. It's going to have a big impact on care for women, not just in the United States but throughout the world." In a crazy example of doublespeak, the genocide of persons with down syndrome is a solution that is going to have "a big impact on care for women." This is not the genocide of an entire class of people, having a particular characteristic, which the Washington Post article didn't even attempt to overstate, "The syndrome results when a baby has three, rather than two, copies of the 21st chromosome, causing distinctive physical features, developmental problems and an increased risk of a variety of health problems that usually shorten the child's life span." The taking of down syndrome life is so prevalent, that euphemism (the substitution of an inoffensive term for one considered offensively explicit) in terms of describing who persons with down syndrome are is unnecessary. We are taking the life of a whole class of people because they have, "distinctive physical features," "developmental problems," and an "increased risk for a variety of health problems." Step back for a moment and think about this. If this doesn't cause you great concern, it should. People with down syndrome are some of the nicest people you will ever meet. But we choose to kill them, to wipe them out in the name of a "big impact on care for women." It is sick.

In response to this article, the National Review online posted its own editorial entitled, "Defining Life Down: Are we okay with eliminating a class of humans?" This article does a pretty good job in defining the issues and confronting us with the reality of the situation, we are "eliminating a class of humans."

Through training I have received from the Syracuse University Training Institute or Human Service Planning, Leadership and Change Agentry I have become sensitized to the issues. We are on a fast track to increased devaluation and termination of the lives of persons with disabilities. But my real question is, "What about the church?"

We, the Christian Church, are embracing the sins of the culture in direct opposition to the obvious and "most central themes of the Scriptures" (as Jim Wallis states). "Social location often determines biblical interpretation (also Jim Wallis). Our social location is anywhere where people with disabilities aren't. No wonder we think we can exclude them with impunity in the face of God's commands.

McNair
(fcbu)

Pride sucks or "I am better than you!"

I have been thinking a lot about pride as it relates to a variety of areas in my life, but particularly in relation to persons with disability.

If I were honest with myself, I think I would say that I believe I am better than my cognitively disabled friends. Its shameful to admit that, but I believe it is true. I am smarter than most, I am physically better off than most, I am wealthier than most, I have more opportunities (which of course I feel I deserve because of my efforts, my hard work), and on and on. The only thing which in any way reigns in my self-absorbing pride is the fact that God tells me that I am not better than anyone else. God tells me that we are all equal. In fact, the fact that I believe I am better, may make me worse than many others, particularly those I feel I am better than.

But I don't think that my problem is restricted to me (unfortunately). I honestly believe that in their heart of hearts, most of those who attend a church and call themselves Christians hold the same perspective as I do about how I/we, rank in relation to those among us who are disabled. I/we, like to say that we are all equal at the foot of the cross, but I (for example) have a Ph.D. and many of my friends are cognitively disabled, so obviously that can't be true. I/we say that we want to evangelize the world, however, I/we won't go out of our way to bring a disabled person to church so that can't be true. I mean, either I don't think the disabled person is worth my time, worth my effort to be picked up (because I am too busy to pick him up, or I have plans after church, or something else related to me and my importance) or I honestly do think they are my equal or perhaps even my better and do go out of my way to pick them up.

On several or more occasions the NT states that salvation is a gift, "so that no one can boast." So I/we don't boast about my having access to the most important thing, the point of life, because it is a gift, but I/we am quick to boast (although through socialization, not out loud) about all the other things I/we am able to do, which are of course, once again based upon my/our own efforts. I boast by my actions or by my inaction. I boast by my unwillingness which is only unwillingness because of the pride I have which makes me feel that I have more choices than I probably actually would have if I weren't so full of pride. One might think these other things that seem so important, are the most important thing the way I/we tend to rate these other things in importance by my/our behavior. The most important point in life is free, it is a gift so that no one can boast, but I/we exclude people on the basis of things which are not important. I/we don't brag about my/our salvation because it is a gift. But my intellect, my behavior, my physical stamina, my health, my good looks (if I had them) are of course not a gift, so those things can be the basis of differentiation amongst people.

I see myself through such a strange perspective. If I see God through a glass darkly, I see myself through a brick wall. We chuckle at the pride of others when we see it, because we see others the way they really are as compared to the way they think they are, we think. We also think we see ourselves clearly. I think that if it weren't for God in his mercy protecting me from seeing myself as I really am, I would be stymied to the point of being totally incapacitated by my pride, my sin, my self-centeredness my total disregard of God's purposes. But instead, he allows me to live on in some fairyland of totally unsupportable ideas of who I am. Particularly who I am in comparison to others around me, and particularly in comparison to those who I see as below me, not worthy of my time or effort. Those who are "not a priority for ministry at this time," as I have heard too many times from Christian church leadership. What does it mean if a person or a group of persons is not a priority for ministry at this time? It seems to obviously imply that I, in my pride, can determine who is worth the effort (see Sept 28 entry), and unfortunately, for too long persons with cogntive disabilities have not been worth my/our effort.

Can you see how this is a problem of pride? Pride in individuals like me and pride in the church as a whole?

But there is something that I can boast about with total confidence. That is that God loves me, the way I am, full of myself and my importance. But God loves my friend with disabilities the way he is, full of himself and full of his importance. I wish I loved my friend like God loves me and my friend the same. I wish I believed in the importance of my friend with disablities like God believes in the importance of me and my friend the same. I wish I could be willing to give my life for my friend with disabilities like God gave his life for me and my friend the same. I wish my behavior reflected the principles of equality that I say I believe in. I wish my behavior reflected the importance of all people before the cross the way that I say I believe in the importance of all people. I wish my thoughts about myself and my friends with disabilities reflected the thoughts of God about me and my friends with disabilities being both the same.


McNair
(fcbu)

Isaiah 53: 2-3, 4

A student in one of my classes at California Baptist University, shared this verse in reference to persons with disabilities. I may be the only one, but I hadn't thought of how Christ's experience is so similar to that of those with disability. Isaiah writes,

He had no beauty or majesty to attract us to him, nothing in his appearance that we should desire him. He was despised and rejected by men, a man of sorrows, and familiar with suffering. Like one from whom men hide their faces he was despised, and we esteemed him not...we considered him stricken by God, smitten by him and aflicted.

A very interesting characterization which could easily describe many persons with disabilities. Christ understands them.

McNair

Prayer as a leveler

The Light and Power Company at Trinity Church in Redlands, California recently hosted an all church prayer meeting. The meeting was sparsely attended by around 30 people, but it was a great time.

In preparing for the event, it occurred to me that prayer would be a great leveler of persons within the church. God is not honored by our "much words" and all prayers are pretty much equal. For me to go on and on about the surgeon's training and hands and whatever else comes to mind does not make my prayer any more effective than that of someone who simply says, "Help Sally get better." At the same time, however, the "childlike" faith of persons with cognitive disability may cause a qualitative difference between my and their prayers. My intellect often fills me with doubt, whereas their limited intellect allows them often to pray doubt free.

Please consider instituting a prayer session sponsored by the persons with disabilities in your church. It gives teeth to the lesson that we really are all equal at the foot of the cross. It also should raise the esteem of persons with cognitive disability in the eyes of other members of the church. There are people who will literally not be prayed for if not for the prayers of persons with disabilities, with cognitive disabilities. This is very powerful.

McNair
(fcbu)

Rob Bell's Velvet Elvis

Independent of you might think of the "emerging church" movement, there are some interesting comments being made by those in one way or another who are involved in that movement. For example, Rob Bell (pastor of Mars Hill Church in Grand Rapids Michigan, an amazing church which I had the opportunity to visit a week ago with a dear friend, Dan Morton) in his book Velvet Elvis, wrote the following:

If the gospel isn't good news for everybody, then it isn't good news for anybody.

And this is because the most powerful things happen when the church surrenders its desire to convert people and convince them to join. It is when the church gives itself away in radical acts of service and compassion, expecting nothing in return, that the way of Jesus is most vividly put on display. To do this, the church must stop thinking about everybody primarily in categories of in or out, saved or not, believer or nonbeliever. Besides the fact that these terms are offensive to those who are the 'un' and 'non', they work against Jesus' teachings about how we are to treat each other. Jesus commanded us to love our neighbor, and our neighbor can be anybody. We are all created in the image of God, and we are all sacred, valuable creations of God. Everybody matters. To treat people differently based on who believes is to fail to respect the image of God in everyone. As the book of James says, 'God shows no favoritism.' So we don't either.

This is a controversial statement no doubt, but the point of the church surrendering itself to radical acts of service and compassion, expecting nothing in return is something we have lost to a significant degree. Yes there are pockets of radical service, however, we as an entire church body could hardly be characterized as being involved in radical acts of service, nor could we as individual members of churches be characterized as involved in radical acts of service (I count myself among these individuals).

But what is the example of our Lord? Somehow, I need to make the radical acts of service more important than the probably thousands of hours I spend with my children or on my own in sports activities, for example. If we are doing anything radically, we are missing the example of Christ in a radical manner.

McNair
(fcbu)

Nicholas Wolterstorff on Matthew 25

Dr. Nicholas Wolterstorff provided the Alan Keith Lucas lecture at the recent NACSW ( North American Association of Christians in Social Work ). He spent a significant amount of the lecture discussing the Matthew 25 scripture regarding judgement: the separation of the sheep and the goats. He made the point that the translations which have predominated over the years may be in error in translating the word dikaios as "the righteous" rather than as "the just" or "the just ones". No doubt this distinction will be dealt with in depth in the book on justice which he has sent off for publication. However, it is an interesting distinction. So to fail to do justice to the "least of these" is to fail to do justice to Jesus himself.

One of the primary points I think he made was that justice implies the worth in another. I strive to facilitate justice for another for reasons unrelated to myself (my righteousness) and more related to the desire for all people to live under just conditions. I go beyond just aiding victims to attacking victimizers.

He also made the comment that in the Beatitudes, that the translation should not be "Blessed are those who are persecuted for the sake of righteousness" but rather "Blessed are those who are persecuted for the sake of justice" or doing justice. He commented that those who are righteous aren't typically persecuted for doing righteous things. Rather those who do justice or are constantly advocating for justice can be quite annoying ie. the recipients of persecution.

He also talked about how the Bible uses the word "downtrodden," the implication being that they are being actively trodden down.

In summary, he said, attentiveness to justice means attentiveness to the worth of another. This is a fascinating take on a section of scripture often used in relation to persons with disabilities or mental retardation. The least of these deserve justice because of their worth. Their worth comes from their humanity, not their cognitive or other ability levels. Disability does not decrease worth and therefore does not diminish one's right to justice.

McNair

Disability transformation movement

I have recently been in contact with Dr. Don Grossnickle, a member of the Diocese of Chicago of the Catholic Church. In our discussions, he used the term, disability transformation movement in reference to the kinds of changes that he, I and others are attempting to make within the church. There is a great deal going on across the country in these areas. I have recently been able to participate in only a couple of these conferences.

We had the PreSummit on church and disability facilitated by Bill Gaventa, the force behind so many positive movements which have occured over the years relative to faith groups and disability. It was a marvelous meeting in Washington DC attended by many powerful groups (powerful in terms of the changes they are making in churches and the lives of persons with disabilities). I expect to see more from this group.

Then there was the "Through the roof" summit held by the Joni and Friends organization in Pasadena, CA. Once again, a gathering of some wonderful people who really have a vision for the future of the church and persons with disbility. Of course Joni was there, but also people like Dr. Jim Pierson, and someone who I think will be a significant player in this area in the future, Steve Bundy of Pasadena Nazarene church.

I just got back from the National Association of Christians in Social Work conference (nacsw.org) which also had rumblings of issues related to social justice. Dr. Nicolas Waltersdorf, the well-known Christian philosopher from Yale University, spoke about social-justice describing a way of translating the Matthew 25 chapter about sheep and goats in a different manner. We also placed an add from NACSPED (nacsped.com) calling on NACSW members to work in their own churches to open them up to persons with disabilties by volunteering themselves to develop such ministries.

So things are happening in the disability transformation movement. Should you know of other things happening across the country, please respond to this blog and let us know about the activities.

May God bless our efforts.
McNair

(fcbu)

Church's protective function

I recently had the opportunity to attend a training on the sanctity of life put on by the Training Institute for Human Service Planning, Leadership and Change Agenty at Syracuse University. The training was outstanding and was very eye opening on a variety of levels, however, one of the lessons to me was that I came away with an insight into the potential protective function of the Church in a variety of areas.

First in terms of advocating and looking out for the safety of persons with disabilities, whether it be from bad people in the community, or human services, or even a stay in the hospital. The presence of the a community member in those settings works wonders in terms of changing the perceptions of those around a person with disabilities.

Second in terms of the unborn. If people with disabilities were really enfolded into the local church, people would not be able to make the arguments they make to justify the killing of unborn babies. Quality of life (although it is largely a spurious argument) is believed as an argument by many. If it could be demonstrated that people who are involved in churches are happy and enfolded, it would go a long way to protect their lives before they were born. It would also go a long way in assisting parents to want to have a child with a disability if they are considering terminating the life of an unborn child. They would see an environment where they were supported which would translate to support for their own child.

Other areas might be envisioned as well. But to the degree that we as the Church are not including and supporting persons with disabilities is the degree to which we expose them to devaluing and even death. Go back and look at Ezekiel 34 again. Because we have not brought them in, we place them at risk.

McNair
(fcbu)

A movement of lay professionals

The desire to facilitate a movement of lay professionals is not necessarily an effort to indict the church, but rather for disability professionals to lead by example. In contrast to the way that individuals with disability are not represented in churches in a manner which reflects their numbers in the community, Christian special educators, Christian social workers, Christian rehabilitation counselors, are represented in the Church.

It is we who are in the know about persons with disabilities. Arguably, it is we who have dropped the ball, and not lived up to our responsibilities. As the Bible says, “From everyone who has been given much, much will be demanded; and from the one who has been entrusted with much, much more will be asked” (Luke 12:48). We who have been given much knowledge and significant experience with the disenfranchised in society, hold a special responsibility to recognize their absence in the Church and rectify that situation. We need to be doing the work of inviting them in, introducing them to our congregations, and as appropriate, developing programs for them. In the same manner as we might be critical of a person with financial abilities not coming to the aid of her church should it need financial guidance, we as human service workers should be held accountable. The Church is disobedient, but then it has been disobedient in this area for a long time. There have been pockets of incredible insight and programs that must delight the Heart of the Lord, but there is also incredible ignorance, uncaring and a lack of concern. The Church is disobedient because we have been disobedient.

Church leaders speak of all people being created in the image of God, of all souls being equal, of the value of every human life, but as we look around our congregations, we don’t see the diversity typical of the community represented in our congregations. Where are the nearly 20% of persons nationwide who are disabled? Where are the 10% of persons with “severe” disabilities? Where are the people with mental retardation? “These people honor me with their lips, but their hearts are far from me” (Matthew 15:8) might be a fair characterization of the church in reference to persons with disabilities.

Those of us who are attempting to change the Church face barriers from our pastors, barriers from our denominations, barriers from those who sit next to us in the congregation. But rather than trying to overcome barriers, we dismiss ourselves from our responsibility in the name of church/state separation, or the rules of our organizations relative to clients, or the ignorance of our congregational brothers and sisters or our pastor. Or we say that our training and our work with persons with disabilities is our job and our church life is our church life. Personally, I need to see the chapter and verse on that one. This cannot be something that our Lord would condone. Can we as believers say that we are unwilling to serve in a particular area, especially when that area is our area of strength, the area we are devoting our working life to? Can we as believers say that we are unwilling to serve, when partially due to our lack of service, the Church lives in disobedience?

We hear pastors, or children’s program leaders, or Christian school administrators tell us that programs are too expensive, or too time intensive, or require persons having a lot of training. How do we respond to these excuses for living in disobedience? The last question is the easiest to dispel for the disability professional. Simply say, “I have a lot of training and I will run your program.” However, the types of things that are required to open the Church really don’t take a tremendous amount of training. Are church programs for persons with disabilities too expensive? A survey of pastors of churches running such programs says they aren’t (Sanchez & McNair in preparation). A survey of people who attend Christian churches say they are not (McNair in preparation). As a professional in the field of special education, I would agree with both of these groups and say that such programs are not expensive. Well aren’t programs too time intensive? Well, service is time intensive, but programs for persons with disabilities aren’t any more or less intensive than other programs.

However, the toughest protestation to the initiation of a program for persons with disabilities is that “Its just not a priority right now.” So ala Matthew 25, church leaders indict themselves. That will be my response in the future should I ever hear that excuse again.

We, the experts, need to act like the experts we are. Imagine going to your pastor to correct his interpretation of the Greek on a particular biblical passage. My pastor wouldn’t take too kindly to my attempted correction, and he would be right to not listen to me as I have never studied Greek or Hebrew, or systematic theology. But he has never studied the education of persons with mental retardation, or behavior management or best practices in the delivery of human services. I am the one who needs to take the lead in this discussion. I should know enough about my Bible to tell her/him where to get off should she/he talk about such a ministry not being a priority (I don’t need Greek or Hebrew to do that). But I have to be the one to go forward on these issues.

I had a discussion with a pastor and a couple of his staff members once. At one point in the discussion, one of the people in attendance said, “Nobody stays up at night wondering how to teach people with mental retardation about the Bible.” I responded, “I do,” which was the absolute truth.

Special education professionals live disability, particularly special education classroom teachers. They do, because if they don’t, they will be eaten alive by their students, or the student’s parents, or their administrators among others. But that preoccupation with persons with disabilities and the types of services they require, needs to be carried over to the church setting so as described in Matthew 25, they can be obedient to God’s command there and elsewhere to minister to the least of these.

Pastors, you need to confront disability professionals with their responsibilities in the church. You need to bring people with disability into the Church and support the efforts of those who do the same. As leaders in the Church, you are disobedient yourselves, and are allowing those within your purview to be disobedient as well.

Did Christ see people with disability? Very often these people are also poor. Did Christ have any interest in the poor? We read the stories of the extent to which Jesus went to minister without considering the context or the effort on his part to get with these people. Jesus’ interactions with persons with disabilities are breath-taking, and they were intentional on his part. We trivialize these interactions when we use them simply as illustrations or metaphors of spiritual principles. These were real people confronted by a real God, and these confrontations with real people by a real God are ubiquitous in the New Testament.

So don’t miss the priority Christ gives to these people as an example for you as a church leader in terms of the priority you should give to these same individuals who are living in your midst today. If you say that these people are not a priority, you indict yourself and diminish the service of those who do work with the disenfranchised.

And professionals in disability, don't miss your responsibility to help a disobedient church to become obedient. If you, if we do not facilitate the inclusion of persons with disability into the church, who do we expect will? We are the experts.

McNair

Interfaith Disability Pre-Summit summary article

Rev. Bill Gaventa prepared this summary article for distribution about the wonderful Interfaith Disability Pre-Summit which was held just recently in Washington D.C. I provide it for your information. Bill also indicated that this article is "For Immediate Release: (Please feel free to adapt to your own publications, add information or perspectives, etc.)." Bill is once again to be congratulated for conceptualizing and pulling off this marvelous meeting.

McNair


Interfaith Disability Pre-Summit Draws Over 100 to Washington, D.C.

On Tuesday, September 20, more than 100 representatives from Protestant, Catholic, Jewish and public and private provider and advocacy organizations involved and interested in religious service and supports with people with developmental disabilities and their families met for a first ever interfaith summit at St. Margaret’s Episcopal Church in Washington, D.C. The gathering was a “Pre-Summit” because it occurred just before a first ever national summit between eleven national disability networks organized as the Alliance for Full Participation. (www.allianceforfullparticipation.org)

The Interfaith Summit involved the representatives from the National Council of Churches Committee on Disabilities, the AAMR Religion and Spirituality Division, the National Catholic Partnership on Disability, the National Apostolate for Inclusion Ministry, the Religion and Disability Program of the National Organization on Disability, Friendship Ministries, YACHAD (The National Jewish Council for Disabilities), the United Synagogue of Conservative Judaism, the Consortium of Special Educators in Central Agencies for Jewish Education, the National Association of Christians in Special Education, the Union for Reformed Judaism, the Jewish Reconstructionist Federation, and Lutheran networks including Bethesda Lutheran Homes and Services, Inc. and Mosaic, Inc.

The highlights of the Presummit included three presentations by national leaders in disability advocacy to the interfaith gathering. The first was Patricia Morrisey, Director of the Administration on Developmental Disabilities. The second was Chester Finn, the President of SABE (Self Advocates Becoming Empowered, Inc.). The third was Sue Swenson, the incoming Executive Director of The Arc. All of them were asked to address ways that faith communities and networks could address major needs and goals being discussed at the Alliance for Full Participation.

A second highlight was a presentation by Jeff McNair of the results of an Interfaith Survey conducted over the summer of 2005 designed to research the perspective of faith communities and networks on the issues and needs being addressed at the Alliance for Full Participation. More than 70 people and networks responded to the 10 page survey, leading to more than 150 pages of comments, ideas, and suggestions. The Executive Summary of the Survey can be downloaded from www.aamrreligion.org. (Or use your own website if you put it there) and the full results of all the responses can be viewed at to http://jeffmcnair.com/Presummitsurvey.htm.

A third highlight was the incredibly high energy in the meeting, and the networking between individuals and groups. That was assisted by a reception and shared dinner, with a celebration of the presentation of the Henri Nouwen Award by the AAMR Religion and Spirituality Division to Sara Simon, a pioneer in Jewish supports with people with developmental disabilities, and the first ever Jewish recipient of this award. Meditations led by Gerry Hendershot, Ginny Thornburgh, Sister Gabrielle Kowalski, James Vanderlaan, and Rabbi Matthew Simon closed the evening, along with written statements of commitment by more than 50 participants about what they would do with their experience in the pre-summit.

Without a doubt, though the highlight of the day was a poem composed and read by Nate Hajdu, a direct support professional who works with Charlie Swenson. Sue Swenson invited three of the direct support staff from Jubilee, Inc, a Mennonite-based organization in Maryland who supports her son, to come and talk about the ways that their faith shapes, and is shaped, by their work with people with developmental disabilities. All three were articulate and moving, but the poem “My Friend Charlie,” read by Nate Hajdu about the spiritual journey on which Charlie had led him was simply a profound, moving, and sacred moment. (The poem is attached.)

For more information about the Pre-Summit, please contact one of the following sponsoring partners:

• Bill Gaventa, AAMR Religion and Spirituality Division, and The Boggs Center on Developmental Disabilities.732-235-9304. bill.gaventa@umdnj.edu
• Jeff McNair, National Association for Christians in Special Education. jmcnair@calbaptist.edu
• Nella Uitvlugt, Friendship Ministries,1-888-866-8966, friendship@friendship.org
• Linda Larson, NCC Committee Coordinator, 763-300-6163. Lindjhl@aol.com,
• Jan Benton, National Catholic Partnership on Disability, 202-529-2933, 202-529-2934 (tty), jbenton@ncpd.org
• Barbara Lampe, National Apostolate for Inclusion Ministry, 1-800-736-1280. qnafim@aol.com
• Ginny Thornburgh, NOD Religion and Disability Program, 202-293-5960, religion@nod.org
• Sr. Gabrielle Kowalski, AAMR Religion and Spirituality Division President, 414-410-4109. gkowalski@stritch.edu
• Gerry Hendershot, Cornell University Institute for Policy Research, ghendershot@earthlink.net
• Jeffrey Lichtman and Jason Lieberman, YACHAD, National Jewish Council for Disabilities, (212) 613-8229. krackol@ou.org.
• Sara Simon, United Synagogue of Conservative Judaism, Consortium of Special Educators in Central Agencies for Jewish Education, and Jewish Reconstructionist Federation. srsimon@erols.com
• Rabbi Richard Address, Union for Reform Judaism, Rfaddress@aol.com
• Linda Ogden, Mosaic. 319.653.5192. cell: 319.461.3435 lynda.ogden@mosaicinfo.org
• Earl Bleke, Bethesda Lutheran Homes and Services, Inc. 920-206-4408, ebleke@blhs.org

Return on Investment

The following is a quote from the book Instruction of Students with Severe Disabilities by Martha Snell and Fredda Brown (Pearson, 2006).

Another misguided value system, called return on investment, places a high value on serving students who have a favorable, history and prognosis for being "fixed" - those likely to contribute the most, economically, to society. The return-on-investment approach fails to recognize the many noneconomic contributions made by people, including those with the most severe disabilities.

The return-on-investment value orientation is based on a curative mentality that sends negative messages to children with disabilities and their families. Imagine what it might be like to continually get the message, "You are not OK the way your are. In order to be OK, your disability has to be fixed and you need to be more like us (people without disabilities)." Increasingly, self-advocates are asking that their disabilities be viewed as a form of natural human diversity and that others' efforts be less about "fixing" a person's disabilities and more about accepting individuals for who they are and providing necessary and self-determined supports.

In addition, the return-on-investment approach tends to discriminate against individuals with the most severe disabilities. It seeks to justify the differential valuing of people and the services they recieve on the basis of the severity of their disability characteristics. Anytime schools sanction practices that imply that some students are more worthy of staff time and resources than other students, there is a serious problem. All children are worthy, although they have differing needs.

Note the final comment "Anytime school sanction practices that imply that some students are more worthy of staff time and resources than other students, there is a serious problem. All children are worthy, although they have differing needs." How does the church fare using this criteria? Are we a place that emphasizes a return-on-investment philosophy? I hope we aren't but I am afraid we are.

McNair (fcbu)

Useless Eaters

Useless Eaters is a powerful website developed by Dr. Mark Mostert of Regent University. The website provides detailed information about the systematic taking of lives of persons with disabilities in Nazi Germany. The presentation is powerful, professional and very moving. I learned a great deal that I was unaware of before visiting the website. I highly recommend the site to you. You can find it at the following link.
http://www.regent.edu/acad/schedu/uselesseaters/

McNair

Pre-Summit Executive Summary

The Pre-Summit was the idea of Rev. Bill Gaventa and was truly a memorable event. Bill compiled an executive summary for attendees which I provide for you at the following link.
http://jeffmcnair.com/presummitsurvey/executivesummary.doc

I will continue to keep you informed about activities/programs/research resulting from the Pre-Summit. It has the potential of being an historic event in ministry to and with persons with disability.

McNair
(fcbu)

Leadership in prayer

Last night we had a meeting of the leadership of our "Light and Power Co." program which seeks to integrate persons with disabilities into our local church. In the midst of the discussion of future activities, we got the idea of having L&P sponsor an all church evening of prayer. At the time it sounded like a good idea: give back to the church by praying for the needs of the church, opportunities for integration between persons with and without disability, good stuff. But the more I think through this idea, the better it seems to me.

One thing that persons with disability, particularly cognitive disability can do is pray. Their prayers are often short and to the point (John is going into the hospital for cancer surgery . . . "Oh Lord, please guide the hands of the surgeons and help them to be a blessing-blah-blah-blah" versus "God, please help John get better, Amen.") which can be a good example. Their prayers are heartfelt. We have one member of our group who cannot keep himself from crying nearly every time he prays. They oftentimes have bigtime faith. But the bottom line, is that their prayers are EQUAL to my or anyone elses prayers. SWEET! You don't need to be highly intelligent or have any special skills to be able to say a prayer. So their service is equal in every way to that of those in the church who do not experience disability.

Man do I love the level playing field we have before the Lord. As I have mentioned elsewhere in this blog,

BUT- God chose the foolish things of the world to shame the wise . . . He chose the lowly things of this world and the despised things - and the things that are not - to nullify the things that are, so that no one may boast before him. (1 Corinthians 1: 27-29)

We can set the standard for a life of prayer through the example of persons with cognitive disabilities. We for sure can raise the standard for the church through the prayer life of persons with disability. This is truly exciting.

So start this at your own church. The disabiled community has all the skill required to be the leaders of the church in prayer. Lets raise the bar and set the standard.

McNair
(fcbu)

Pre-Summit to the Alliance for Full Participation

I write this entry from my hotel room in Washington D.C. the morning of the Pre-Summit to the Alliance for Full Participation. The Pre-Summit was conceived of by the Rev. Bill Gaventa, a long time advocate of the religious/spiritual needs of persons with disabilities. He writes the following in the program guiding the day long activities entitled, "Where there is no vision the people perish (Proverbs 29:18):"

As participatns in the Pre-Summit and the Alliance for Full Participation, we hope that you will see and use this document as a means for further dialogue and collaboration with congregations, clergy, and faith-based organizations in your states and communities... Thank you for taking the time to read and digest this short report from a groundbreaking event. We hope it helps build a vision that is both "deep" and "wide," and one that will build bridges of partnership and collaboration between faith networks and public/private services and supports with people with developmental disabilities and their families.

When I return from Washington, I will put a link to the complete contents of the Pre-Summit program in this blog.
Please pray for our deliberations today.

McNair

Lausanne Conference White Paper

Dennis Kingsland of Joni and Friends, turned me on to this interesting white paper on ministry to persons with disability which came out of the 2005 Lausanne International Christian conference which was held in Thailand. The interest group on disability ministry was facilitated by Joni Eareckson Tada. Good discussion of theological issues/scripture as they relate to persons with disability and ministry to persons with disability. You can get a pdf version at the following address.
http://jeffmcnair.com/Lausanne2005DisabilityWhitePaper.pdf

Enjoy,
McNair

Interfaith Disability PreSummit

Next week there will be an Interfaith Disability PreSummit, held in Washington D.C. This is a "presummit" as it comes before the National Disability Summit which will occur towards the end of the week. I (along with Bill Gaventa and Nella Uitvlugt were privileged to be able to assist in the development and analysis of a survey to in some ways guide discussions with those at the Summit over ways in which the religious community can contribute to the development of supports for persons with disabilities. I would invite you to visit a website where the results of the survey are posted.

You can visit
http://jeffmcnair.com/Presummitsurvey.htm to see the raw open ended question data as well as some basic frequency analysis of the numerical data. We hope to digest this information further in the coming months.

(fcbu)
McNair

The Theological Voice of Wolf Wolfensberger 2

I have been reading The Theological Voice of Wolf Wolfensberger, which is a book of Dr. Wolfensberger's writings on disability from a theological perspective. Dr. Wolfensberger is renowned for his work in areas related to human rights, education and other issues impacting particularly persons with developmental disabilities. However, this book (edited by Bill Gaventa and David Coulter) is an absolute must read for persons interested in notions of mental retardation and disability from a theological perspective. The next few entries will interact with some of the thoughtful discussion provided in this volume.

In "An Attempt Toward a Theology of Social Integration of Devalued/Handicapped People" (a paper presented in 1978) Dr. Wolfensberger takes on the notion of segregation by whomever of a group deemed as different in some way. This principle has particular relevance to the church to the degree that it acts to segregate persons with various disabilities from the general congregation. The following comments are made about how segregation begins.

In truth the one single characteristic of a person, or of a group, that can override all other shared characteristics of people in being used as the justification of segregation can be utterly trivial. It is remarkable in itself that one single characteristic can be presumed to differentiate people so totally, i.e., in that this characteristic can override everything else, even thousands of other characteristics the segregtaors and the segregatees share. If we just contemplate this one little reality, we may be stunned by its magnitude, expecially when we consider that this one overriding characteristic can be something as minor as skin color, the shape of one's ears, left-handedness in Japan, or something of this nature. Even when the characteristic is not trivial, it pales in comparison to the massiveness of the shared characteristics...segregatory congregation also signals back to society that the one characteristic that the congregated people supposedly share with each other is more important than all the thousands of characteristics they share with the segregators.

Now there are times when some forms of segregation make a degree of sense because the point of segregation is relevant. For example, we wouldn't expect to see persons with cognitive disability studying medicine in medical schools. Their difference would be a point of relevant segregation from the field of medicine.

What, however, are the relevant characteristics for segregation from a local church?

1 Corinthians 1: 27 and following states,

But God chose the foolish things of the world to shame the wise; God chose the weak things of the world to shame the strong. He chose the lowly things of this world and the despised things - and the things that are not - to nulify the things that are, so that no one may boast before him. It is because of him that you are in Christ Jesus, who has become for us wisdom from God - that is our righteousness, holiness and redemption.

Who has the Church chosen? What are the relevant characteristics that are so different from the rest of us that we see fit to exclude them from out midst? God chooses "the things that are not." Who do we choose?

McNair
(from cbu)

The Theological Voice of Wolf Wolfensberger 1

I have been reading The Theological Voice of Wolf Wolfensberger, which is a book of Dr. Wolfensberger's writings on disability from a theological perspective. Dr. Wolfensberger is renowned for his work in areas related to human rights, education and other issues impacting particularly persons with developmental disabilities. However, this book (edited by Bill Gaventa and David Coulter) is an absolute must read for persons interested in notions of mental retardation and disability from a theological perspective. The next few entries will interact with some of the thoughtful discussion provided in this volume.

In "The Prophetic Voice and Presence of Mentally Retarded People in the World Today" (a presentation made by Dr. Wolfensberger in 1976) the following statements (they really should be read in context) are made.

"So I asked myself, what are the prophetic signs which appear to be unique or very special to our day, which are very different from what they have been at other times. . . Where and how is the Spirit active today in a way that is different from the way it may have been in other eras?
As I posed these questions to myself over the past few years, I began to read both the signs of dysfunctionality and of prophecy in a different and clearer fashion, and I read one very, very powerful prophetic message, coming from mentally retarded people. For instance, I considered that it should not be unexpected if divine messages about the present patterning of offenses should come from people who, in their roles and identities, are exactly the opposite of what our era idolotrates. Who and what is the opposite? The opposite is a person who is not intellectual, not scientific, not technological, and not academic; who does simple instead of complex things; who cannot cope with complexity, and technology which passes him by; and who, possibly, is despised for lack of modernity and intellectuality. Is that not the retarded persons of our age?
But if it is, is there any evidence that God has thrust retarded people into a prophetic role? I submit to you that there is indeed . . .

The article goes on to list 10 signs to substantiate the possibility that persons with cognitive disability are indeed carrying a prophetic message.

-Mentally Retarded Persons are Becoming Much More Public and Visible
-Retarded People are Becoming Internationally Known
-Non-Handicapped and Handicapped Persons are Sharing Their Lives, Often Living Together
-Retarded Persons are Gentling Others
-The Prophetic Manifestation of the Presence of God via Retarded People
-Retarded People Speaking in Tongues
-Retarded People may Withstand Their Culture
-Retarded People May Be Parodying Intellectualism
-The Dance of Spiritual Joy
-Retarded People Are Beginning to Be Persecuted and Martyred

No doubt Dr. Wolfensberger's writing on this topic will cause you to think through, to consider his position. For each of the signs he describes the sign and how he has seen it evidenced. His perspective is very interesting.
Under the sign, "Retarded People are Beginning to be Persecuted and Martyred," he makes the statement,

"The logic is compelling: the world has always tried to put to death God's prophecy, and it is the nature of God's will that prophets must be prepared to be martyrs, and disproportionately they are. The moment retarded people in significant numbers become bearers of the word of God, the principalities and powers will converge upon them to fight and stifle that form of prophecy that is so specially powerful all because of its much more miraculous nature, and because in some ways, it goes beyond what any other type of prophecy has said before (my emphasis). . . we have never been told in systematic prophecy that human intellect is universally bankrupt, and that millennia of technological development is at an end."

There is a connection here, I believe, with our earlier discussions in this blog of down syndrome, prenatal diagnosis, etc. It is not unusual for persons with developmental disabilities, yes, mental retardation, to change those around them. Personally, I recognize a kind of a prophetic voice about the importance of love and caring and genuine friendship. These kinds of principles fly in the face of the calculations which are driven by technology . . . "Will this person have a good quality of life?" . . . "Is it cheaper to test infants for PKU, or just to deal with the disabilities which will result if we don't?" . . . "What do the percentages tell us about whether or not parents carrying a particular gene will produce a child with a disability?" . . . "Is is more cost effective to spend millions of dollars on political campaigns, or to provide housing subsidies to persons on fixed incomes?" . . . and so on.
And where is the moral compass in this situation? Where is the salt that gives the world its flavor? Where is the light on the hill?
Wolfensberger makes the claim that persons with mental retardation are prophets to the culture, to the church. You may not agree but it makes you think.

I am confident that Jesus would be hanging out with the unwelcomed people with mental retardation and other disabilities in the group homes and care facilities.

McNair

Who sinned?

I met briefly today with a friend of mine, who is a professor of Theology. He related the story of a woman who came to him and told of how the pastor of her church said that the reason that her son was born blind was because of her sin. My friend was amazed at the story: that someone would still be accused of sin for the birth of a child with disability, particularly in the light of scripture (I had told him of my experience in this area, but he could hardly believe me). But he also provided a great response. He said that the woman should have replied to the pastor, "Is your son blind as well?" That response that would provide a true understanding of sin, what it is, and what our condition is as members of a depraved generation. It also points to the fact that sin is overwhelmingly NOT the reason for disability.

McNair
(from cbu)

Lutheran Church Missouri Synod statement

The following is a statement passed by the Lutheran Church Missouri Synod at their 2004 convention.

To Facilitate Ministry with and to People with Disabilities
RESOLUTION 6-09
Overture 6-02 (CW, p. 245)
WHEREAS, Physical, mental, and emotional disabilities may significantly limit participation in worship,
fellowship, education, service, and outreach activities; and
WHEREAS, People with these disabilities are able to make positive contributions to the life of a parish;therefore be it Resolved, That the LCMS Board for Human Care Ministries address the following matters:
1. A mission statement for this ministry with and to people with disabilities;
2. A congregational self-assessment tool to assess the needs of people with disabilities;
3. Plans and guidelines to address physical and attitudinal barriers in churches;
4. Suggestions whereby people with disabilities can be involved in the life and ministry of a congregation;
and
5. Congregational outreach to people with disabilities to achieve participation in the life and ministry of the congregation.
Action: Adopted (10)
(After introduction by the committee, a request was made to move the question unanimously. The convention instead
closed debate, and the resolution was adopted as presented [Yes: 982; No: 18].)

This is a great general plan for the development of ministry for any church (I wonder who the 18 were who voted against this?). Churches who want to develop ministry in this area need-
a mission statement,
to do a self-assessment,
to look for physical and attitudinal barriers,
to look for avenues for involvement in life and ministry, and
outreach to achieve participation in the congregation.

You see, it really is quite simple. Obviously it is not easy to examine one's attitudes but if people with disabilities are thought of as just people, and the attitudes toward them examined as if they were attitudes toward any person, progress can be made.

McNair
(from cbu)

A moving prayer

This past week, a friend and hard worker who attends our Light and Power class at Trinity Church was honored for her last week in the class. She is moving across the country. Anyway, at one point we gathered around her, and as is our custom laid hands on her and prayed for God's blessing and direction. Amy, a member of our class contributed to the blessing by offering a beautiful prayer. After speaking of how we will miss Lella in a voice broken with emotion, she said ". . .and I pray that God will give you peace in your life at your new home." It was a lovely prayer with a heartfelt sentiment.

Lella had devoted a significant amount of time assisting Amy and her family over the past few months. In spite of her cognitive disability, Amy wanted to give back to Lella in some way and did through her beautiful prayer.

It made me once again wonder how many people would not be prayed for if persons with cognitive disability didn't pray for them. I am impressed with the steadfastness of these individuals in remembering to pray for people known to them. Remembering their parents and families and friends. Their righteous indignation over injustice when they become aware of it.

I will never forget a man named James who was an elderly adult with mental retardation. James was fiesty and let you know what you think. At one point in a lesson I was giving in class, I mentioned that several children had been abused by their parents. They had been locked in a closet for months fed through a slit in the door. Angrily but tentatively James rose to his feet and said, "I will not stand for that. I will not let that happen." Although powerless to do most things about the abuse of children, James used what he had, impressing those there that day with the absolute evil of the situation. He also used his voice to pray that such abuse would stop.

Do we really believe that all people are equal in the sight of God? Do we really believe that God hears our prayers, ALL of our prayers by ALL of us?

By the way, Amy has down syndrome. In a perfect world (see July 7th entry) her voice and therefore her prayers would not be heard as she would have been aborted to protect HER from a poor life quality.

"I will not stand for that. I will not let that happen."

McNair
(fcbu)