Disability Friendly Interpretations of Scriptures
Many traditional interpretations of sacred stories have served as barriers to the full inclusion and participation of people with disabilities in their faith communities. It is possible to remain true to the text while also taking the realities of people with disabilities and their families into consideration. Below are some ideas to help religious leaders think about this important issue. If you have additional suggestions that should be added to the list, please let us know.
Language we use matters. Examine the ways we choose to use disability-related language. What does it mean to say that someone is blind to the will of God or deaf to the voice of God? Is there another way to talk about people’s refusal to respond to God’s will that doesn’t equate acts of ignorance or disobedience with a disability?
Consider the context. Consider sacred stories in the context in which they were written and out of which they came. Do we have additional information about disabilities today that helps us understand both the role of God and the role of the community in the lives of people with disabilities? Historically, disabilities were understood as a punishment for sin or a test of faith. Do we have resources that tell alternate stories about the origins of illnesses and disabilities and what that might mean about how we interpret our sacred stories today?
Reread familiar stories. Question assumptions about the ways disabilities are usually interpreted in sacred texts. There are many characters with disabilities in our sacred stories. When those stories are read, what is being communicated about the character of God? What do they communicate about the nature and character of the subjects of the stories?
Consider the difference between healing and curing. Do our sacred texts provide stories about people with disabilities who serve the creator while having a disability? Are there examples of people who are cured of disabilities that go on to live out their lives without disabilities? What might it mean to experience a curing of a disability and is this different than what it might mean to experience healing?
How does the community respond? Sacred stories speak of individuals with disabilities and the communities where they live. It may prove helpful to consider the community’s response to an individual with a disability. How are our communities the same and different from those written about in scripture? Can we take any guidance about what it might mean to build a community of support around people with disabilities and their families?
Where do we detect themes? What messages are our sacred texts trying to communicate about inclusion and exclusion? Do we get the idea that hospitality and inclusion are important values in our traditions? What happens when there are competing claims? How do we make sense of those?
Examples for further consideration:
Exodus 4:10-16
Moses refuses to lead the people out of Egypt because he has a speech impediment. Moses is called upon to be a spokesperson for the people. God’s response is to provide an accommodation. Moses is to lead the people and when it comes time for him to speak he is to tell Aaron the words and Aaron is to speak for him.
Mark 10:46-52
This is the story of a blind man named Bartimeus. This story is often read to highlight the manifestation of the power of God, but what if we read it from the point of view of Bartimeus. Who is he? What gifts does he possess? How does the community respond to him?
Sura 80: He Frowned
The Prophet Mohammed (Peace Be Upon Him) is rebuked by Allah because he ignored a blind man who interrupted him. The content of the rebuke provides instruction about not valuing people solely based upon what is seen. What is essential in this passage is that what should be understood is the heart.
Ideas for further reading:
Abrams, Judith, Judaism and Disability: Portrayals in Ancient Texts from the Tanach through the Bavli. Washington, DC: Gallaudet University Press, 1998
Black, Kathy. A Healing Homiletic: Preaching and Disability. Nashville: Abingdon, 1996. |
