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