Mark Stephenson

Bill, you asked, "If a person is able to do everything well that is required to be done on a sports team, which requires mental, social, psychological, and physical qualities, then in what other ways might this person be "disabled?""

A blind or a deaf swimmer, or a deaf runner, or a deaf basketball player all could fit the definitions of "disabled" and "skilled athlete." We are so used to conventional ways of doing things in sports (a starting gun or a buzzer) that we can't imagine how someone with a disability such as hearing impairment could compete. But, for example, a series of flashes could be used in addition to a buzzer to start a swim event. Oscar Pistorius is a flesh and blood example; an outstanding runner who also has a disability.

My understanding of this law is not that it will force coaches to include kids without the necessary abilities to be included on a team, but that it requires organizers of the sports to rethink how to make it possible for kids who have disabilities to compete fairly with the rest of the competition. It's purpose is to reduce disability discrimination in school sports.

John, I'm sure we are very close in our thinking. Obviously, you care a great deal about the people in your life, including people with disabilities, and see them as the image-bearers of God that they are. You see the person first, as I also try to do. Regarding language, on the one hand, if we get too uptight about what we say, we'll never be able to talk about any controversial subject at all. But If we speak or write without regard to the feelings of hearers or readers, then we show disrespect, even if the disrespect is unintentional. Let's say that a company division just got a new manager, fresh with her MBA out of prestigious business school. Without getting to the know the people or the culture of that division, she immediately implements a variety of changes in the way her division works. She hasn't taken the time to listen first and build trust and respect before implementing changes. Thus, she communicates disrespect. Similarly, if someone is going to write or speak about disability, he needs to listen to some people who live with disabilities and listen to what others are saying and writing about it before diving in, otherwise, unintentionally, he communicates disrespect because he has not listened to the collective experience of others. That's my sense of what happened with this particular devotional by Lucado. Once again, he's a great writer and pastor and has done many people good through his work. But we all make mistakes. I wrote about this devotional as a teaching tool to remind all of us who speak and write that we are held to a higher standard, and we must take care, lest our words have the opposite effect of what they intend.

Ken, what do you think? How would you answer your own questions? Mark

b-ver, thanks for your comments. Here's a Wikipedia article which will help you understand what I meant when I wrote, "In fact, people who are Deaf (capital D) will tell you that not only is their deafness not a disease, it is not a disability at all."

Lorraine, thanks for the encouragement. And thanks for spreading the good words to your youth group, and many others. I've heard many people also use similar phrases like, "He is bi-polar." A phrase like that implies that his bi-polar disorder defines everything about him. I wear glasses because I have myopia, but I would not like it if people said about me, "He is myopic." Mark

The resurrection will be unimaginably wonderful for all who are raised to new life in Jesus Christ. Instead of giving my thoughts about your question, it would be much better for you to ask someone who considers herself to be a member of the language and cultural group who call themselves the Deaf.

b-ver,

I agree too that the change must take place in the heart. However, change can happen in either direction. A changed heart can change what comes from our lips, and what comes from our lips can change our hearts.

Words change how we think and live. We Protestants believe that words are the most important tool for affecting change in the heart, in behavior, and in society. That's why the pulpit is the primary piece of furniture in most protestant churches, not the table or the font. Ask any dictator, revolutionary, congressperson, or MP about the words, and they will tell you that these are their primary tools. In fact, Robert Roberts is so convinced of the importance of words to human life, that he coined a term to describe the primary nature of human life, we are not herbivores, carnivores, or omnivores. We are "verbivores." Words are our primary food.

Besides the power of language to change behavior and hearts, there's another good reason to use people first language. Most people who live with disabilities prefer to be referred to using people first language. I think that when it comes to people groups, whether an ethnic group in Africa, an ethnic minority in North America, or people with disabilities, people outside the group should not decide for the members of the group how they should be referred to. Rather, members of the group should decide for themselves how they want to be referred to. Others who are outside the group should then use that particular term. It's simply a matter of respect. Why doesn't society refer to "negroes," or "colored people" anymore? It's because (most) people in society want to respect the preference of this ethic group and refer to them as (most of) them ask. So we use the term "African American." Similar, most people who have disabilities do not like the term "the disabled" (and many similar ones) because these terms identify people with their disability. Let's listen to people with disabilities, and how they ask society to refer to them by using people first language.

Help me, John. I don't recall Jesus saying anything about what our resurrected bodies will be like. In fact, Scripture as a whole is sketchy as to what the new heavens and earth will be like. Revelation 21:4 says, "‘He will wipe every tear from their eyes. There will be no more death’ or mourning or crying or pain, for the old order of things has passed away." But it doesn't say how God will accomplish this wonderful new life. As far as I remember from Scripture, what we do know about the resurrected body is the little that is said about Jesus after he arose. And that, shockingly, is that the disciples did not recognize him at all, except in the marks of his most disabling moment, his crucifixion! (Luke 24:36-40) These marks became part of his identity which he will carry with him throughout eternity. Likewise, in some truly amazing way, God will make sure that the "old order of things has passed away," while still maintaining our identities. The late Nancy Eiesland, who lived with a congenital condition and needed to use a wheelchair, did a very interesting theological reflection on Jesus' resurrection body and her own identity and disability that you may want to read.

b-ver and John,

Thanks for your comments. I think what we are talking about is the whole matter of hope. This gets personal for me. My mother now lives with severe dementia. One of my daughters has lived with severe disabilities her entire life. I have never been able to have a conversation with her. And for a guy who loves words, this is a painful reality that I live with. Walking is difficult for her, and her lungs are full of scars so that she can only walk a few feet before become winded. I firmly believe that when all things are made new in Christ, mom will have her mind back, and my daughter will have abilities that she never had on this earth. I can't wait to sit down with her and have a conversation, but that won't happen on this earth.

My point in this blog has not been to question that God is going to renew all of our bodies in the new heavens and earth, my point is that those of us who write and speak must be very careful how we speak about that so that we foster hope, not crush it.

Since we've been talking about the Deaf community, let's imagine a man who is a member of that community. (b-ver, a man is as good example as a woman.) My example is hypothetical, but it is all based on real people. Let's imagine that this man, Ted, is born to parents who are also both deaf and speak American Sign Language (ASL) in the home. When Ted was born and his parents learned that he, like them, was deaf, they rejoiced because he would be much more a chip off the old block than if he had been born with hearing. Ted grew up in this home speaking, from his very first word, in ASL. He went to Deaf schools and graduated from Gallaudet University, whose mission is to ensure "the intellectual and professional advancement of deaf and hard of hearing individuals through American Sign Language and English." His wife, his occupation, and his friendships all revolve around the fact that he his deaf. Then Ted comes across this statement written by a Christian leader, "I hate disease. I’m sick of it. So is Christ. Consider his response to the suffering of a deaf mute . . . "

Ted might think to himself, "Wait a minute. People who were deaf in Jesus' day probably did suffer severely. But that's not me. Since when has deafness become a "disease?" I can't imagine myself not being deaf. It's has formed who I am. In fact, if heaven means that I have to give up my entire identity, then I don't want any part of it."

Now contrast Ted with Herm. (I was Herm's pastor, though I've changed his name.) As Herm's hearing grew worse and worse, he withdrew from his wife, his children, and grandchildren. He considered himself too old to learn to read lips, and didn't want to ask others to write things out. More and more, he was alone in his thoughts, and grew more and more depressed. Now imagine that one day Herm's wife reads these words in a devotional, "I hate disease. I’m sick of it. So is Christ. Consider his response to the suffering of a deaf mute . . . " When she finished the devotional, she said outloud, "Amen." She showed it to Herb who read it and a tear formed in his eye. They copied it off and sent it to all the children.

My main point in this blog is this: as leaders seek to foster hope, they need to keep people like Ted in view as well as Herm. I could give many more examples as well, such as Amos, who embraces his brother Mark's identity as someone who lives with Down Syndrome, and can't imagine why God would take away that identity when Mark goes to heaven.

Of course, the bottom line is that for each of us, our identity is not in the accidents of our bodies but in our union with Christ. For many who live with a disability, that disability is a horrible intruder in their lives, and they can't wait to shed it. But for some of our fellow Christians, their identities are closely allied with their disability. Those of us who speak and write need to be careful not to alienate those folks as we seek to comfort the people for whom disability is a rude intruder.