Mark Stephenson

Nick, thanks. Great idea to make your own hypo-allergenic communion bread. Recipe is here, for anyone interested.

Hi Joy,

Let's take these in opposite order. There are many theories regarding the increase in autism diagnoses. First and most important, the rise in autism diagnoses is NOT caused by the increase in vaccination rates. The theory of vaccinations causing autism has not only been shown to be false, but also a fraud perpetrated to line the pockets of certain people. The rise in diagnoses may not indicate that any more people today have autism than, say, 100 years ago. A diagnosis uses specific criteria, and as those criteria have changed over the years, rates of diagnoses have increased. Regarding the church's response, the important thing is not so much the diagnosis, but the welcome the church gives to people who bear the image of God. 

That brings me to your first comment. Yes, it's true that some people who have autism are violent. It's also true that some men are violent, and some white people are violent, and some . . . are violent. We in the church should never hold prejudice against a whole group of people because they happen to share some characteristic. Instead, the church needs to be the welcoming community it is called to be, welcoming people with autism, and men, and white people, and . . . And if some individual, whether that individual has autism, or is male, or is white, begins to engage in inappropriate behavior, the church must take steps to set boundaries, not deciding immediately that he doesn't belong, but deciding to work with him to help him learn appropriate behaviors. I've consulted with a number of congregations who have done exactly that; what a beautiful expression of the love of God for all of us! "Because of his great love for us, God, who is rich in mercy, made us alive with Christ even when we were dead in transgressions—it is by grace you have been saved." (Eph. 2:4,5)

Chong,

Thanks for sharing this resource. The Registered Disability Savings Plan is another program for people in Canada that people with disabilities and care givers need to learn about.

Mark

Bill, I disagree. You mention physical ability and mental capacity as ways to define adult, but in Canada and the US we define "adult" by chronological age. When someone reaches 18 or 21 (depending on what responsibilities are granted) we call them "adults." To put a 10-year-old in the nursery, or a 12-year-old in a Sunday School class for 3rd graders does these individuals a great disservice. Likewise, baby-talking to people who are in their 40's. We need to treat people who are of age as adults. Sure if an adult has intellectual disability, we do Bible Study on a level that he or she understands, but surely not have him sit in a Sunday School class with little kids.

Jeanne, I praise God for the loving community at your church. From your description, it sounds like your church, this family, and this young man made decisions about his involvement in church based on his needs and his spiritual growth rather than on what people are most comfortable with. An expression of what a healthy body of Christ looks like!

Thanks Bonnie. You provide another good reason why it would be good for adults with intellectual disabilities to be with the adults without disabilities in Sunday school classes and other activities. My experience with adults who have intellectual disabilities is that many of them are much less limited by adult conventions than we who call ourselves nondisabled.

It's nearly impossible for science, good science, to make a blanket statement about a condition as complex as autism. However, the article I cite says, "The American Academy of Pediatrics, the CDC, the World Health Organization, and the Institute of Medicine all agree that there's probably no relationship between autism and vaccines." Considering the enormous, real, and documented risks posed to unvaccinated children, compared to the highly unlikely connection between autism and vaccines, I still feel the need to express my belief that the most responsible and loving choice a parent can make is to have his or her child vaccinated.

Regarding your final question, I'm strongly prolife. Your question is a difficult one, though you ask it in a misleading way. Your question makes it seem as if babies are continually aborted in order to create vaccines. In fact, some, not all vaccines, use stem cell lines from three babies that were aborted decades ago - two in the 1960's and one in the 1980's. Just because these abortions happened decades ago does not make the action of the abortions morally acceptable. However, as this article from Right to Life of Michigan  points out, "The further away the current act (using a vaccine) and intent (protecting a child from a disease) of an individual are from a previous immoral act (aborting a child), the less that individual is restricted by the immorality of the previous act. While the act of aborting the child was certainly immoral, all of the steps involved with the development and use of the vaccines thereafter did not cooperate with the abortion." This article goes on to cite a number of authorities who agree that using these vaccines is morally acceptable.

Millie, I'm sorry to hear it. Is there someone in your church leadership that has a heart for making your church a more welcoming place that you could talk to about it? Bringing about change in a church needs to be a team effort. Mark Stephenson

Pam, great questions. Although Jeff's blog entry, Universal Design and the Christian Church, does not exactly answer your questions, it provides a lot of what you are wondering about. Mark