Pastoral Relationship with People with Intellectual ... - Theses

205frameworks that transcend able-bodied frames-of-reference that exclude peoplewith disability. She proffers a biblical vision that includes people with disabilityas theological subjects and historic figures. 547 As she states, “... such revelationand truth is embodied in the image of Jesus Christ, the disabled God.” 548 Whilstsuch a conceptualisation is to be commended for indicating the incarnate Christ’stotal solidarity with people with disability I would argue that by dint ofdescribing God as disabled it promotes the image of a God whose total sense ofincarnately-described identity is subsumed by a disabled status. Therefore, Iadvocate for the ascription of ‘God with Disability.’The ascription ‘God with Disability’ underpins my pastoral, theologicalunderstanding of the God who is incarnately present with the people withintellectual disability with whom I engage in pastoral relationship. It is this Godwho is in total solidarity with these people from the perspective of being peoplewho are living with a disability. It is this God who has such regard from theperspective of seeing them as whole people, people living with a disability, butwhose disability is integrated into their overall created identity.However, the terms ‘Person with a Disability’ and ‘God with Disability’ canunderstandably be seen to conceal Disability behind all-encompassingconceptualisations of God and Personhood. This serves to discount the disabilityand its crucial role in shaping identity. Alternatively, phenomenologist MauriceMerleau-Ponty suggests that our embodied identities 549 are a location forepistemological development. In other words, bodies create knowledge.Therefore, the multitude of bodies that inhabit creation each contribute to therichness of our humanness and serve as revelations of the broad range of547 It is to be pointed out that Eiesland, from a rights-based liberationist perspective, indicatesthat her book is concerned with those people with disabilities who have the cognitivecapacity to claim their rights. This clearly excludes those with cognitive limitations.However, I would refer to the previous discussion concerning ‘A Preferential Option for thePoor’ where it is asserted that the incapacity of the person with intellectual disability to thinkautonomously and claim their liberationist-based rights is overcome by the role of pastoralcarer as advocate. Here, the carer, through careful attention to the individual’s narrative,including their socio-politically lived context, develops an awareness of the rights that are tobe claimed, and speaks up for those rights where the person is unable to do so for themself.At this point, Pattison’s liberationist discussion of the institutional advocacy role of thepastoral carer speaking up for those with mental illness bears careful noting. See,Pattison, Pastoral Care and Liberation Theology, 176-80.548 Eiesland, The Disabled God, 90.549 Here I would include our cognitive capacities.