Disability and religion

[surditate_vero]

Disability has always interested me, both in itself and how society perceives it. Actually, not just how /society/ perceives it, but how disabled people themselves perceive it and their experiences - the body of thoughts and emotions and actions that shape "experience."

The issue of disability comes up frequently in the Bible, particularly in terms of its relationship to sin. It's been a common theme to disability scholarship both in the medieval past and in the present. But the Bible appears to have a contradictory message when it comes to disability and its relationship to sin when one compares the attitudes in the Old and New Testaments, so it's worth taking a look at the passages and seeing what they say.

In Deuteronomy 28, the rewards for obeying God are listed, along with the punishments for not obeying Him. Deuteronomy 28:28 notes that one punishment is the affliction of the disobedient with madness and blindness.

Furthermore, God reminds Moses that it was He who makes man deaf or mute, gives him sight or makes him blind - a suggestion that disability has a divine origin of sorts (Exodus 4:11).

In the New Testament, however, we are all familiar with the stories of Christ healing the blind, the mute, the deaf, and the insane (or possessed).

In John 9, Jesus heals a man who was born blind. His disciples put the question to him: was it the man's sins or those of his parents that caused him to be born blind (9:2)?

Jesus' reply is worth quoting in full here:

Neither this man nor his parents sinned," said Jesus, "but this happened so that the work of God might be displayed in his life. As long as it is day, we must do the work of him who sent me. Night is coming, when no one can work. While I am in the world, I am the light of the world." (9:3-5)

This story suggests that disability is not a punishment, but rather a physical manifestation of the work that God has wrought in all of us. It also suggests that the disabled have as much a role to play on this earth as the able-bodied do. Furthermore, it implies that the disabled are no more susceptible to sin as the able-bodied are: all are capable of sinning, as all are capable of hearing the word of God and accepting it.

There is also an interesting dynamic at play here. The blind man was blind from birth - his disability was congenital, not acquired. Is there a difference between those who are born disabled and those who acquire it later in life?

One last issue: does disability exclude people from hearing and accepting the word of God? That is, is someone who is born completely deaf or with a mental illness that renders them a permanent child, intellectually speaking, limited, if at all, in his or her understanding and/or participation in the word of God?

[Luet]

I absolutely believe that disability is in no way a punishment for sins. I also believe that the disabled, in almost all cases, have the ability to hear and accept the word of God and develop a relationship with him. The only exception to this I can think of is the most extreme mental handicap where there is not even a child-like level of mental ability.

[Petra]

I think that, at least in Christianity, to be trapped in a childlike- or less-than-childlike consciousness automatically means that you're an innocent. (Not taking into account original sin, if you believe in it.) On the other hand, there are so many different facets of Christianity that you can't really pinpoint one that definitively whether or not children (and the mental equivalents of children) are innocents and saved, or if they'll go to hell if they die unbaptized. That's the thing about religion--it is so far beyond subjective there isn't even a word for it.

What interests me isn't the current perception of whether or not disabilities are punishments for sins; in this day and age, if you say that they are then you're considered backwards and intolerant.

Instead, I wonder what the shift was between the Old Testament God of fire, brimstone and vengeance, and the new ideals that Jesus brought to the table. Like surditate_vero (Vero?) said, the Old Testament God was dead-set on disability being a punishment for sins.

Even if you take into account the Christian belief that the Father, Son and Holy Ghost are three facets of the same entity, thereby bringing the Son's experiences among mankind to incorporate into the entity, it still doesn't explain how that meshes with omnipotent omniscience.

Can an omniscient God "change His mind?"

[Eaquae Legit]

There's a fine line, though, Petra, between saying someone is innocent because of their mental capacity, and denying their personhood. I know that sounds odd, probably, but I can't really call someone innocent or child-like when I know they are adults. It's something I often mull over.

I don't know about "changing his mind," but it's a good question. Perhaps it has something to do with the idea of different "economies." Theologically, I think we're in the "economy of grace," whereas the time of the Torah is/was the "economy of Law." But then, I suppose we're back to the question of God changing his mind, so that doesn't really help, does it? It would be interesting to hear from Ela or another Jewish pwebber what the Rabbis taught about these disability passages...

[Luet]

In Deuteronomy 28, the rewards for obeying God are listed, along with the punishments for not obeying Him. Deuteronomy 28:28 notes that one punishment is the affliction of the disobedient with madness and blindness.

Furthermore, God reminds Moses that it was He who makes man deaf or mute, gives him sight or makes him blind - a suggestion that disability has a divine origin of sorts (Exodus 4:11).

[Disclaimer: I am not claiming that this is the only way to take the verses but I am just offering some ideas. I don't want anyone to get offended. I am not trying to start an argument but just throwing some thoughts out there. Italics added in the last paragraph.]

Here is what I could find as an explanation for these two verses in my reference books:

Deuteronomy 28:28 - Among the dire consequences the Israelites would suffer for disobedience, madness was listed. As a result of the oppressive measures of their conquerors, they would become maddened, responding in an unreasoning way because of frustration. (De 28:28-34) Indeed, King Solomon stated that “mere oppression may make a wise one act crazy.”—Ec 7:7.

Exodus 4:11 - Although God has on occasion caused blindness and muteness, he is not responsible for every case of such disabilities. (Genesis 19:11; Luke 1:20-22, 62-64 [interestingly there are occasions in the Hebrew and Greek scriptures) These are the result of inherited sin. (Job 14:4; Romans 5:12) Since God has allowed this situation to exist, however, he could speak of himself as ‘appointing’ the speechless, the deaf, and the blind.

[Eaquae Legit]

That's a really good point, Nom. "Madness," especially the frenzied kind, is really often used figuratively. I suppose it's quite possible that "madness" could be a punishment for sin, but not being the sort of thing we think of as madness.

[lyons24000]

EDIT: Not applicable to the thread.

(I can't delete it for some reason so I just wrote this!)

[Jebus]

Makes sense. What kind of fair and loving god wouldn't punish children for the mistakes of their parents?

[Rei]

I guess I find this topic a strange one, to me. Because I believe that God is the same in all time and utterly unchanging---the idea that God would be a God of punishment and later a God of grace is absurd to me. And while there are a lot of places where there a contradiction may appear strongly, this is not one of them. Rather, it fits in perfectly if one considers elements such as Fortune, Fate/Providence, and free will.

Fortune is that force which delights in change itself. She causes both favourable and unfavourable winds in our lives. Favourable winds give us a time of rest and ease, and unfavourable winds teach us how to sail and how to be better navigators of the sea of life.

And really, to be born with disability is because of Fortune. To acquire a disability is also because of Fortune. But Fortune is not merely random. She is directed by the course of Fate. Fate is how the winds will be blowing at a given point at a given place on the sea. Fate is based on Providence, that is, the mind of God. If we retain the analogy of sailing, we are aiming to cross the ocean and our destination is true happiness. We are blown one way and another, and depending upon how we respond to these winds in the different parts of the sea, which are dictated to be as they are by Fate, we will go to different portions of the sea. That is what our free will does: it gives us the freedom to respond to where Fortune tries to push us. We need to exercise our free will in order to sail towards our common destination, or Fortune will buffet us until our ship has sunk.

And so God may make a man blind, and God may heal another of blindness. Or God may well do both to the same person. But God is acting according to the pattern he has set down in the universe and according to where each person has travelled, which he has seen by the virtue of being omnipresent in time and space.

It's all in Boethius... it's all in Boethius...

[surditate_vero]

You've been reading too much of Boethius' Consolatio Philosophiae, haven't you, Rei? =P

I suppose what you're trying to get at is the question of choice: in all of this, we still have a choice what we do with what we have, do we not?

In the end, it all depends on what we perceive as being a disability, I think.

[Slim]

I find it interesting that sometimes when Jesus heals someone, he says "Go and sin no more." Does that mean the affliction they had came as a result of sin?

But obviously from the story you quoted of the blind man, although sin may lead to disabilities, we can't say that disabilities come from sin.

In reality, in some form or another we all have "disabilities" -- thinks we are weak at.

Ether 12:27
And if men come unto me I will show unto them their weakness. I give unto men weakness that they may be humble; and my grace is sufficient for all men that humble themselves before me; for if they humble themselves before me, and have faith in me, then will I make weak things become strong unto them.

[surditate_vero]

Hm. I didn't know of that quote from Esther - thanks!

[Luet]

Um, Esther only has 10 chapters, so that is not from the Bible book of Esther. Not to mention that he wrote "Ether"; I'm guess it's from one of the LDS books?

[lyons24000]

It's from the Book of Mormon.

[surditate_vero]

Thanks!

[Slim]

Woops, I should have mentioned that. Especially since even I got Ether and Ester confused when I was younger. Thanks, guys.