Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-mlc7c Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-19T12:16:22.731Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Making the Invisible Visible: Inviting Persons with Disabilities into the Life of the Church

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  23 May 2018

Mary Carlson
Mary Carlson*
Affiliation:
Marquette University
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Christianity espouses the dignity of all humanity and professes welcome for all to the communion of saints. Yet people with disabilities, especially those with more severe or profound physical or psychological disabilities, are largely invisible inside our houses of worship. This article examines the meaning of dignity and inclusion through the lenses of Christian anthropology, disabilities liberation theology, and the lived experience of persons with disabilities. It concludes with some suggestions on how to begin inclusion.

Keywords

disabilitiesChristian anthropologydisabilities liberation theologymarked bodies
Type
Articles
Information
Horizons , Volume 45 , Issue 1 , June 2018 , pp. 46 - 73
Copyright
Copyright © College Theology Society 2018 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Swinton, John, “From Inclusion to Belonging: A Practical Theology of Community, Disability and Humanness,” Journal of Religion, Disability & Health 16, no. 2 (2012): 172–90CrossRefGoogle Scholar (emphasis in the original).

2 Devries, Dawn, “Creation, Handicappism, and the Community of Differing Abilities,” in Reconstructing Christian Theology, ed. Chopp, Rebecca S. and Taylor, Mark Lewis (Minneapolis: Augsburg Fortress, 1994), 131Google Scholar. Devries, as an advocate, is understood here to use “seen” metaphorically.

3 Dutch theologian Hans Reinders says that when he asks clergy about members of their congregation with disabilities, the most frequent response is that there are none. Reinders, Hans S., Receiving the Gift of Friendship: Profound Disability, Theological Anthropology, and Ethics (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans. 2008), 335Google Scholar.

4 Ralph Ellison, Invisible Man (1947; New York: Random House/Vintage International, 1980), 3.

5 Ibid., 577.

6 UNESCO, “Overcoming Obstacles to the Integration of Disabled People,” Report to the World Summit on Social Development, ed. Rachel Hurst (Copenhagen: Disability in Action, 1995). This denial of access to clerical roles follows in the Catholic Church's tradition of denial of ordination for marginalized groups, such as African Americans. For instance, see Davis, Cyprian, The History of Black Catholics in the United States (New York: Crossroad, 1992)Google Scholar and Copeland, M. Shawn, Uncommon Faithfulness: The Black Catholic Experience (Maryknoll, NY: Orbis Books, 2009)Google Scholar. The exclusion of people with disabilities is evident from the Vision Vocation Network website (https://www.vocationnetwork.org/en/articles/show/235), which helps seekers to find the minority of orders who will take candidates with disabilities. The web page features the Benedictine Sisters of Jesus Crucified: “Founded in France in 1930, the Roman Catholic Order of Benedictines of Jesus Crucified is one of the few religious orders that widely accepts women with physical disabilities. The order maintains . . . a fully accessible facility that is currently home to 21 sisters. Sister Mary Zita, OSB, vocation director, says the community is able to accept women who are blind, have heart conditions, diabetes, orthopedic conditions, post-polio conditions, and spinal bifida. They do not accept women with mental or neurological disorders.”

7 Lev 19:14 (NRSV).

8 Eiesland, Nancy L., “Barriers and Bridges,” in Human Disability and the Service of God: Reassessing Religious Practices, ed. Eiesland, Nancy L. and Saliers, Don E. (Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1998), 200–229Google Scholar.

9 Helen Betenbaugh and Marjory Proctor-Smith, “Disabling the Lie: Prayers of Truth and Transformation,” in Eiesland and Saliers, Human Disability, 293.

10 Matt 8:1–4, 16–17, 28–34; 9:27, 18–26, 27–31, 32–34; 11:5–6; 12:10–14, 15, 22–28; 14:34–36; 15:21–28, 29–30; 17:15–19; 20:29–34, 21:14 (NRSV). The biblical language is less than sensitive, and reflective of the times.

11 United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, Pastoral Statement of U.S. Catholic Bishops on Persons with Disabilities (Washington, DC: USCCB, 1988)Google Scholar.

12 Ibid.,1.

13 Ibid., 2.

14 Ibid., 3.

15 Ibid., 3–4.

16 Ibid., 4.

17 Ibid., 6.

18 Holland, Jonathon, Gilger, Patrick, and Gaunt, Thomas P., Disabilities in Parishes across the United States: How Parishes in the United States Accommodate and Serve People with Disabilities (Washington, DC: CARA, 2016), 1Google Scholar.

19 Fletcher, Laura, “Ramp It Up: How Parishes Can Increase Accessibility,” U.S. Catholic 78, no. 12 (2015): 18–22Google Scholar, at 19.

20 Quoted in Fletcher, “Ramp It Up,” 21.

21 Gutiérrez, Gustavo, A Theology of Liberation (Maryknoll, NY: Orbis Books, 1988), 9–10Google Scholar.

22 Ibid., 171.

23 For a summation, see Eiesland, Nancy, The Disabled God: Toward a Liberatory Theology of Disability (Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1994)Google Scholar, chap. 3, “The Body Politics,” 49–67.

24 Ross, Susan A., Anthropology: Seeking Light and Beauty (Collegeville, MN: Liturgical Press, 2012), 92–94Google Scholar (hereafter Light and Beauty).

25 Eiesland, The Disabled God, 67.

26 For an opposing viewpoint, see Reinders, Hans S., Receiving the Gift of Friendship: Profound Disability, Theological Anthropology, and Ethics (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans. 2008), esp. chap. 4, pp. 123–50Google Scholar.

27 Eiesland, The Disabled God, 63.

28 See Eiesland and Saliers, Human Disability and the Service of God.

29 While I have no expertise in canon law, in terms of ordination, it appears to be more a case of prevailing expectations rather than canon law. According to the Vatican website, men are not expressly banned from the Roman Catholic priesthood because of any specifically named disability except for “amentia or other psychic illnesses,” which could have a broad application (canon 1041). However, they are impeded by having unnamed “irregularities” for which they can be given a dispensation only by the Holy See, or in some cases, local bishops. Canon 1051 states that “there is to be a testimonial of . . . a properly executed inquiry about his state of physical and psychic health.” Again, it appears that the hierarchy has vast discretion. http://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG1104/_INDEX.HTM.

30 Holland, Gilger, and Gaunt, “Disabilities in Parishes,” 5.

31 Don E. Saliers, “Toward a Spirituality of Inclusiveness,” in Eiesland and Saliers, Human Disability, 19–31, at 20.

32 DeVries, “Creation, Handicappism, and the Community of Differing Abilities.”

33 Goffman, Erving, Stigma: Notes on the Management of Spoiled Identity (New York: Simon & Schuster, 1963)Google Scholar; quoted in Sarah J. Melcher. “Visualizing the Perfect Cult: The Priestly Rationale for Exclusion,” in Eiesland and Saliers, Human Disability, 57–58. I do not accept all of Goffman's theory, but find it useful to address stigma. There are many critics of aspects of Goffman's theory. For one example, see Eiesland, The Disabled God, 58–61.

34 DeVries, “Creation, Handicappism,” 127.

35 Ibid., 131 (emphasis in the original).

36 Copeland, M. Shawn, Enfleshing Freedom: Body, Race, and Being (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2010), 2Google Scholar.

37 Ibid.

38 Womanist theologian Monica Coleman explores the intersectionality between racism, sexism, and able-ism, based on her authentic, lived experience and her faith journey in Bipolar Faith: A Black Woman's Journey with Depression and Faith (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2016)Google Scholar.

39 Massingale, Bryan N., “The Systematic Erasure of the Black/Dark-Skinned Body in Catholic Ethics,” in Catholic Theological Ethics Past, Present, and Future: The Trento Conference, ed. Keenan, James F. (Maryknoll, NY: Orbis Books, 2011), 116Google Scholar (emphasis in the original).

40 Ellison, Invisible Man, 6.

41 Ross, Light and Beauty, xii.

42 See Reinders, Gift of Friendship; also Haslam, Molly C., A Constructive Theology of Intellectual Disability: Human Being as Mutuality and Response (New York: Fordham University Press, 2012).Google Scholar Haslam's definition of being human isn't located in capacities for rationality or choice: “Rather, drawing upon the conception of imago Dei in Genesis 1, as well as Martin Buber's I and Thou, I argue that our humanity is located in relationships of mutual responsiveness with the Thou we encounter . . . . To conceive human being in terms of relationality versus capacity offers a conception of the human that is no longer discriminatory of individuals as participating fully in the category ‘human,’ as participants in these relationships of mutual responsiveness” (15). Additionally, important theological work in terms of expanding our idea of who makes up the Body of Christ, and how people should be welcomed, has been done by others, including Reynolds, Thomas E., Vulnerable Communion: A Theology of Disability and Hospitality (Grand Rapids, MI: Brazos Press, 2008)Google Scholar and Yong, Amos, Theology and Down Syndrome: Reimagining Disability in Late Modernity (Waco, TX: Baylor University Press, 2007)Google Scholar. While their work is valuable in many ways, I have not engaged these authors because Reynolds’ concept of “response-ability” relies too much on self-agency for my arguments here, and Yong's strong connections between the dignity of the individual and of the caregiver are not particularly suited to my thesis.

43 Reinders, Gift of Friendship, 1–2.

44 Ibid., 137.

45 Ross, Light and Beauty, 70.

46 This category of disabilities has numerous definitions that are somewhat in flux. My definition of persons with “profound” disabilities applies to those individuals who, because of severe and/or multiple physically and/or psychologically handicapping conditions, have difficulty communicating their needs to others and are unable to meet their basic needs themselves.

47 Iozzio, Mary Jo, “Thinking about Disabilities with Justice, Liberation, and Mercy,” Horizons 36, no. 1 (2009): 32–49CrossRefGoogle Scholar. Iozzio challenges our ideas about what ability and disability mean, what relationships mean to people with disabilities, and even the assumption that we know what they mean in light of gospel teaching.

48 Farley, Margaret, Compassionate Respect: A Feminist Approach to Medical Ethics and Other Questions (Mahwah, NJ: Paulist Press, 2002)Google Scholar. Through feminist theology, Farley refutes the idea that independence is what is most desired by people with disabilities, and that independence is the greatest good we can work toward with them.

49 Reinders, Gift of Friendship, 142.

50 Ibid., 150.

51 Ross, Light and Beauty, xi.

52 E.g., Daniel Goleman, “The Experience of Touch: Research Points to a Critical Role,” New York Times, February 2, 1988.

53 According to the 2010 US Census (https://www.census.gov/2010census/), 2.1 percent of the population between the ages of fifteen and sixty-five needed help with the self-care activities of daily living, and that number jumps significantly with age.

54 Saliers, “Towards a Spirituality of Inclusiveness,” 21.

55 Ibid., 22.

56 Ibid., 23.

57 Ibid., 29.

58 Copeland, Enfleshing Freedom, 126–27 (emphasis in the original).

59 These thoughts are gathered from throughout Copeland's book Enfleshing Freedom, esp. chaps. 3 and 4, 55–106.

60 Copeland, Enfleshing Freedom, 84. Similarly, Dussel, Enrique, in Beyond Philosophy: Ethics, History, Marxism, and Theology (New York: Rowman and Littlefield, 2003)Google Scholar, says that there can be no epiphany, or recognition of Christ, except through “the other” (98–99).

61 Copeland, Enfleshing Freedom, 60.

62 La Pierre, Dominique, City of Joy (Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1985), 61Google Scholar. The book is considered fiction because of re-created conversations and some changed names, but according to the author and others, it is largely nonfiction.

63 La Pierre, City of Joy, 86.

64 Christy Brown, My Left Foot (London: Minerva/Reed, 1954/1996), 10–11.

65 Ibid., 102.

66 Ibid., 154.

67 Ellison, Invisible Man, 338–39 (emphasis in the original).

68 E.g., Colleen C. Grant, “Reinterpreting the Healing Narratives,” in Eiesland and Salier, Human Disability, 72–87.

69 I thank the anonymous reviewer who provided the very helpful phrase “able-bodied privilege.”

70 Sobrino, Jon, The Principle of Mercy: Taking the Crucified People from the Cross (Maryknoll, NY: Orbis Books, 1994)Google Scholar.

71 For a fuller explanation of L'Arche, see Vanier's, Jean An Ark for the Poor: The Story of L'Arche (New York: Crossroads, 1995)Google Scholar, and Henri Nouwen's books, including Adam, God's Beloved (Maryknoll, NY: Orbis Books, 1997)Google Scholar.

72 Nouwen, Henri, Reaching Out: The Three Movements of the Spiritual Life (Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1975)Google Scholar; quoted in Jan B. Robitscher, “Through Glasses Darkly: Discovering a Liturgical Place,” in Eiesland and Saliers, Human Disability, 148.

73 Episcopal Diocese of Michigan, “Accessibility Survey,” Disability Awareness, http://www.da-edomi.org/con-survey.html; NCPD (National Catholic Partnership on Disabilities), “Parish Accessibility Surveys,” NCPD, http://www.ncpd.org/accessible-design/surveys; United Methodist Church, “Disability Ministries Audit,” DisAbility Ministries Committee of the United Methodist Church, http://www.umdisabilityministries.org/resource.html.

74 In ST III, q. 80 Aquinas gives us guidelines on including people who would have been called feebleminded, and urges priests to err on the side of inclusion. Additionally, Aquinas has been interpreted broadly to be more inclusive than exclusive as regards including persons with disabilities in the life of the church. See Carlson, Mary, “Aquinas on Inclusion: Using the Good Doctor and Catholic Social Teaching to Build a Moral Case for Inclusion in Catholic Schools for Children with Special Needs,” Journal of Catholic Education 18, no. 1 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar, http://dx.doi.org/10.15365/joce.1801042014.

75 For more information, see SPRED, Special Religious Development, Archdiocese of Chicago, www.spred-chicago.org.

76 Copeland, Enfleshing Freedom, 127.

77 Pope Paul VI, Apostolic Letter, Octogesima Adveniens, May 14, 1971, §48, http://w2.vatican.va/content/paul-vi/en/apost_letters/documents/hf_p-vi_apl_19710514_octogesima-adveniens.html.

78 In an email conversation with Janet McKenzie on September 28, 2016, the artist confirmed that the child upon whom she modeled Jesus had been born prematurely, which caused developmental delays. For examples of McKenzie's inclusive work, see Perry, Susan, ed., Holiness and the Feminine Spirit: The Art of Janet McKenzie (Maryknoll, NY: Orbis Books, 2009)Google Scholar.

79 Robitscher, “Through Glasses Darkly,” 144–45.