Rupturing Concepts of Disability and Inclusion

CHAPTER 2
18
Whilst this passage refers to disabled men, women, as ‘non-men’, are
disabled by nature in this kind of thinking. Disabilities in men cannot totally
eradicate their rights as males, but they are severely curtailed at least in
matters of holiness. In the paradigm of male honor and shame, being less
63
than fully male is certain cause for self-loathing.
5 The Disabled as Objects of Divine Action – The dignity of the disabled and their
status as potentially valued members of their societies is directly challenged by
the Bible’s continuous portrayal of them as objects of divine action. They are
presented as ‘plot-devices’ that show off the power of God or the Anointed One;
however, if the healing fails to materialise, they are viewed negatively and seen
as agents of sin. For those whose physical conditions are not likely to improve,
the questions of faith and personal meaning raised by the Bible’s continued
stress on the disabled/ill person as one in the state of awaiting divine healing can
demoralise and disempower rather than provide a means of continued growth. 64
In her theological examination, Avi Rose also finds similar attitudes towards
those with disabilities. Rose categorises them “under four general headings, which
together can be seen to form the basis of many beliefs within organised Western
religion.” 65 According to Rose, these are:
1. disability as a sign of punishment or evil incarnation;
2. disability as challenge to divine perfection;
3. disability as object of pity and charity; and
4. disability as incompetence and exemption from religious practice. 66
Henri-Jacques Stiker, who surveys the Bible for notions of ‘infirmity’ as well,
draws similar conclusions to Fontaine and Rose. He highlights the notions of
legal, cultural and sacral impurity that linked people with disability in the Biblical
texts to identities of difference and profanity, and to positions of segregation and
exclusion. 68 Stiker also makes some illuminating comments about an implicit
denunciation of violence towards the ‘unfortunate and disfigured’. He contends
that it seems to be the case that the Hebrew biblical texts of the Old Testament
reveal deep-seated violence towards disability and physical or mental misfortune in
as much as the person struck down by misfortune is expected to play the role of the
scapegoat in carrying the burden of sin and the burden of evil. 69 However, this is
not what develops. Instead, there is the imperative for social responsibility. Stiker
outlines how the Hebrew Scriptures do not promote violence of a sacred and
religious nature, but rather promote ethics of a social nature so as to not
‘contaminate’ the divine with sacrifices of ‘abnormal’ beings. The existence of
abnormal deviants as representations of evil are seen to result from the sinfulness
of the human domain, thus requiring moral considerations. 70 New Testament texts
present a different picture due to the actions of Jesus of Nazareth, who, without
denying the overarching link between evil/misfortune and sin, breaks the link
between disability and individual guilt by redefining evil not as external blemishes,
but rather as the way one behaves towards others. Therefore, ethics is no longer
just the consequence of the sacred order of things, but comes to be its foundation. 71
These different beliefs would evoke different practices. This research will show
that Christian churches have emphatically influenced historical understandings and
67