1

“Studying the New Testament using a Disability Hermeneutic: Notes for Contextual Bible Studies”

by Mark Hewerdine (December 2011) (in part fulfilment of MA in Contextual & Applied Theology, Queen's Foundation for Ecumenical Theological Education)

http://www.academia.edu/2252176/_Studying_the_New_Testament_using_a_Disability_Hermeneutic_Notes_for_Contextual_Bible_Studies_

Introduction This assignment utilises a disability hermeneutic in designing Bible studies for a group of people with and without disabilities The work draws on the Praxis model of theology and is shaped by a desire for equality, empowerment and the full inclusion of people with disabilities in the life of a local church.

The diversity of experiences of disability1 is a challenge when designing such studies. However, it is the conviction of the writer that bringing together a group of people with a variety of disabilities, and some without, can provide a rich and fruitful opportunity for learning and action.

Being a temporarily able-bodied writer poses a further challenge. Stanley Hauerwas suggests that the “most stringent power we have over another is not physical coercion but the ability to have the other accept our definition of them.”2 These studies were designed with awareness that a person without a disability should never impose their idea of what a person with a disability ought to think, feel, value or aspire to. Neither can or should they define how a person with a disability should encounter and interpret a text. Before being used in practice these studies would ideally be reviewed and adapted by people with disabilities.

Outline of Context

The studies are designed for use within a reasonably large Anglican church meeting in a predominately white, affluent area of Birmingham. The majority of church members are white, employed professionals or have recently retired from regular employment. The church includes a significant number of people who identify as being disabled – people with visual impairments, hearing impairments, people who experience mobility impairments, and one man who has a learning disability. It is envisaged that the study group would be self-selecting people drawn from this range of people but would be open to able-bodied people – “others who care”, in the words of Nancy Eiesland.3 The group

1 Roy McCloughry & Wayne Morris, Making A World Of Difference (London: SPCK, 2002) p.vii

2 Stanley Hauerwas, Community and Diversity: The Tyranny of Normality in Critical Reflections on Stanley Hauerwas' Theology of Disability: Disabling Society, Enabling Theology ed. John Swinton (New York: The Haworth Press, 2004) p.37 3 Nancy L. Eiesland, The Disabled God: Toward a Liberatory Theology of Disability (Nashville: Abingdon

Press, 1994) p.90

2

would be mixed age and gender.

The church is like many in the UK in having a general awareness of the needs of people with disabilities but where equality, full inclusion and empowerment remain unrealised. For example, in terms of leadership or decisions about the content of services, the needs and views of people with disabilities are not taken into account sufficiently. Able-bodied/non-disabled people hold more power; people with disabilities generally have to adapt to norms assumed by others.

The use of language in church services is at times excluding, and the use of metaphors which marginalise people with disabilities are common in the liturgical life of this church, an issue explored by the work John Hull.4 The recent season of Advent particularly drew attention to this with the preponderance of language equating light and sight with goodness – potentially excluding for visual impaired people.

The church is an evangelical one where the Bible is held in high regard as the inerrant word of God without much evidence of critique of what this means and the problems such a view presents in terms of oppression and liberation. It is expected that the idea that scriptural texts can be excluding, or that the language and cultural norms assumed by writers may be oppressive, would be unsettling to many.

Why include people without disabilities?

Liberation involves those who are oppressed or marginalised but also requires that those in power are educated and conscientized too. Their liberation from the tyranny of belief in normality5 is necessary; maintaining a belief in their normality over against the supposed abnormality of those with disabilities is dehumanizing for both.6

Nancy Eiesland argues that in the crucial task of temporarily able-bodied people gaining empathy for those with disabilities – as a step to liberating action - they must learn to identify with “their own real bodies, bodies of contingency and limits”7. It is hoped that these studies will enable this, as well as affirming the experiences of people with disabilities as resources for theological reflection and action.

Background Notes: Hermeneutical Approach

The studies use a hermeneutic that prioritises the perspective of people with disabilities: a “disability hermeneutic” which shares much with Liberation criticism more generally8.

Many people with disabilities experience marginalisation in many areas of life, including church life. A Disability Hermeneutic shares with other readings for Liberation a desire to

4 For example, see John M Hull In The Beginning There Was Darkness p.95-103 and “'Lord, I was Deaf'':

Images of Disability in the Hymn Books” in Ed. Burns, Slee and Jagessar The Edge of God: New Liturgical Texts and Contexts in Conversation (London: Epworth, 2008) p.117-131

5 Hauerwas, Community and Diversity p.37 6 See Paulo Freire Pedagogy of the Oppressed (London: Continuum, 2000) p.47 7 Eiesland, The Disabled God p.110 8 The work of Nancy Eiesland and Hannah Lewis is described by them as Liberation theology applied

specifically to people with disabilities. See Eiesland, The Disabled God p.9 and Hannah Lewis, Deaf Liberation Theology (Aldershot: Ashgate, 2007) p.62-65

3

do theology “from below”9 not deferring to the views and experiences of those who hold most power. The experiences of people with disabilities will be the lens through which texts are read. These experiences will be brought to bear on the texts, challenging prevailing, oppressive interpretations, and will be used to guide readers in a search for liberating interpretations. This is not a reading which deviates from a “normal” way of reading but one which challenges a narrow definition of normal.10

The insights of “body theology” also inform this hermeneutic, a theology which affirms the human body as the site for experiencing God.11 This approach challenges a spirit-body dualism which values spirit as superior, whilst still recognising that the body can be the “site of damaging and exploitative relations and experiences”.12 Many people with disabilities have had such experiences but have also recognised and argued that this is not due to their nature of the impaired body per se but due to the assumption that there exists a “normal” model for what a body should be and how it should function.

A disability hermeneutic is a consciously bodily hermeneutic, holding centrally that which other hermeneutics may take for granted - that we read the Bible according to the way are embodied in the world (as well as according to the world we are embedded in).13 This hermeneutic assumes that we do, or should, apprehend the text as people for whom our bodies are not a peripheral concern. The hermeneutic used in this assignment also assumes that people with disabilities experience the world differently but not deficiently.14

This hermeneutic assumes people with disabilities as being of equal value and as being whole people. It also affirms their right to bring their experiences to the text and to use them to challenge depictions within the text and prevailing interpretation which are disempowering or excluding.

It may be questionable whether the Christian tradition can be a source of liberation and social change for people with disabilities, since it has in the past been the means of dehumanisation, oppression and exclusion. There is ambiguity – the Christian tradition consistently teaches care for people with disabilities, but also often emphasises their deviation from the norm and the need for restoration back to a perfect humanity.15 The Bible does directly address, from time to time, the experiences and concerns of people with disabilities, but often in a way which indicates a negative attitude within the culture towards disability and impairment: they are seen as problems to be either fixed or managed, people are excluded because of their impairment by legal or cultic prescriptions16, or otherwise dehumanised and marginalised. Scripture tends to assume being able-bodied as normative.

9 Gerald O. West,” Liberation criticism” in Paula Gooder, Searching for Meaning (London: SPCK, 2009)

p.153 10 Paula Gooder, Searching for Meaning (London: SPCK, 2009) p.108 11 Angela Pears, Doing Contextual Theology (London: Routledge, 2010) p.122 12 Pears, Doing Contextual Theology p.122 13 John M Hull, “A Spirituality of Disability” in Studies in Christian Ethics, 2003, Vol. 16 Issue 2 (London:

Continuum, 2003) p.21 14 Hull, Spirituality of Disability p.21-22 15 John M. Hull, A Spirituality of Disability in Studies in Christian Ethics, 2003, Vol. 16 Issue 2 (London: Sage

Publications, Ltd., 2003) p.22, 29 16 For example, Leviticus 21:16-24

4

The Bible is a text produced mainly by people without disabilities – for John Hull it is a “sighted person’s Bible”17 and we could add that it is a hearing person’s text or fully-mobile person’s text in origin and intended audience. This is meant in the sense that it was written by people who took for granted sight and as the norm. However, as Hull and Hannah Lewis18, a Deaf theologian, recognise, it is possible and necessary to find strands and characterisations besides the dominant sighted/hearing/able-bodied ones; strands which offer a different perspective on disability, on bodies and on the nature of living with God in the world as embodied beings.

Another challenge to Liberatory reading is the fact that Scripture frequently deploys excluding metaphors of physical disability. Disability is assumed as negative, something to be disparaged or as a sign of weakness and sinfulness. People with disabilities may be less prepared to gloss over pejorative use of language of impairment in the Bible as “just metaphors”19 – perhaps because people with disabilities are unwilling to “take *their+ bodies for granted”20 in a way people without disabilities might.

This is not always the case, however. Resources for liberating reading and practice can be found in scripture, even though they may not be immediately evident. The aim of these studies is to focus on positive examples of disability and texts which challenge supposedly normal views of bodies and ability, as well as grappling with more difficult ideas. It is possible to discern other counter-narratives.

In summary, applying a Disability Hermeneutic to designing Bible studies means using material which teaches us how to work for liberation and equality, but also questioning the perspectives, assumptions and values of people within scripture and the writers of the text. A final caveat is that since there is no singular, universal experience of being impaired or of disability there can be no singular Disabled theology or reading. The range of texts chosen hopefully reflects this concern.

Background Notes: Model of Contextual Theology

These studies adopt the Praxis model as several features mesh well with the hermeneutical approach and context.

The Praxis model is orientated towards action informed by reflection, in this case the action envisaged is that which is liberating for people with disabilities. As Stephen Bevans notes, Praxis is not necessarily synonymous with liberation but is concerned with theological reflection informing practice and vice versa.21 A Disability Hermeneutic fits with an approach to contextual theology which can take seriously the need for action

17 John Hull, In the Beginning There was Darkness (London: SCM Press, 2001) p.67

18 Lewis, Deaf Liberation Theology p.107-110, 127-128; Hull, In the Beginning... p.133-134 & 141-148

19 John M. Hull, How I Discovered My Blind Brother from The Bible in Transmission: a Forum for

Change in Church and Culture [Bible Society], Spring 2004 (Paper provided by John M. Hull during M1 class, 23/11/11) p.3

20 Eiesland, The Disabled God Eiesland p.31 21 Stephen B. Bevans, Models of Contextual Theology (New York: Orbis Books, 2002) p. 73

5

towards liberation for people who are marginalised due to their disability. The studies are designed with the conviction that God is calling us into God's future and new creation22, and that this can be apprehended through God's word, in the form of scripture, though not confined only to scripture. The texts chosen are intended to be a source for reflection on the experience of disability but also a resource to inspire and guide action in a local church setting.

More than just empowerment for the individual, the Praxis model is, according to Leonard Boff, “aimed at changing social relationships”.23 It is the belief of this writer that there is a need in the local church in question for a change in the decision-making structures such that people with disabilities are no longer excluded from any aspect of local church life. Albert Herzog highlights the lack of access and power given to people with disabilities, including cases of them being excluded from holding leadership positions or being ordained. 24 The study on 1 Corinthians 12 specifically addresses this issue prompting participants to consider what changes need to take place within their context.

A faith and spirituality which is consonant with being disabled will inevitably bring into question the hegemony of the non-disabled. It will challenge their power and privileged position in decision-making. Such a Christian expression will challenge the status quo25 which privileges the experiences of the non-disabled majority above others and which affirms the readings of scripture of those who can see, can hear, have full mobility. Such a challenge is necessary, as Cornell West26 argues, since simply advocating inclusion within unchallenged and unreformed institutions and groups doesn’t go far enough. A Praxis model is therefore the most appropriate in this context.

Though the Praxis model understands scripture as a locus of revelation it also recognises that Scripture and tradition are culturally conditioned and limited.27 Working according to this model allows one to question whether the Bible on its own speaks sufficiently to and of the experiences, gifts, needs and desires of people with disabilities but without dismissing scripture as irrelevant. Scripture may often marginalise people with disabilities as subjects, treating them as peripheral objects to be legislated about28 or healed, but it still contains resources for theological reflection on disability and inspiration for concrete action.

From a belief that God’s revelation and activity are within history it can be affirmed that God is at work and revealing God's self within the experience of being disabled not despite disability. The Praxis model also understands God's presence and revelation is invitational – beckoning all people towards a transformed, liberated future.29 God is

22 Christine Eaton Blair, The Art of Teaching the Bible (Louiseville: Geneva Press, 2001) p.64 23 Quoted in Bevans, Models p. 74 24 Albert Herzog, “We Have This Ministry: Ordained Ministers Who Are Physically Disabled” in Ed. Eiesland

& Saliers Human Disability and the Service of God (Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1998) p.187-188 25 Using Bevans' observation, I would argue that the use of other models such as a translation model when

using a disability hermeneutic can allow the status quo to go unchallenged. Bevans, Models p.139 26 James H. Cone & Gayraud S. Wilmore, Black Theology: A Documentary History (Maryknoll NY: Orbis

Books, 1993) p.413 27 Bevans, Models p.78 28 For example, the Levitical purity codes concerning priesthood and the community in Leviticus 13-14, and

21:16-24. 29 Bevans, Models p.75

6

present and at work within the struggle for equality of people with disabilities.

The experience of people with disabilities is indispensable for broadening our understanding of faith and spirituality, and in understanding how God works and reveals God’s self in the world. Pears highlights the belief, held by those adopting a Praxis approach, that:

“God’s presence is understood…as in the everyday and, very importantly, as committed to revealing and challenging injustice and oppression.” (Pears, p.27)

Using a Praxis model is appropriate since the injustices and oppression experienced by people with disabilities stand against the dynamic, life-giving presence and work of God. Praxis is concerned with “doing the truth”30 and the truth must be done by and with people with disabilities for their liberation and flourishing. Some metaphorical “weeding”31 of the cultural context may need to take place. This may involve people with disabilities allowing their own outlook to be challenged where they have internalised ideas which are dismissive or judgemental of their experience of disability, but it is hoped that people with disabilities will be equipped to effectively challenge the attitudes and practices of others.

The Studies

The Ujamaa project has used an approach to contextual Bible Study known as See-Judge-Act: the relevant context is identified and analysed before moving on to encountering the text. The text is judged in the sense of finding what it has to say to the context. Action in response to what has been understood and discerned is then considered.32 The studies below are informed by this process although utilised in a less linear fashion.

Rationale for Choice of Texts

The following section explores some specific issues associated with the chosen texts. Such detail would be useful for the people facilitating the studies and may be drawn on during the studies to aid discussion.

Mark 10:46-52 - Jesus & Bartimaeus

Though many commentators on this text recognise that it is concerned with more than just healing, it has nevertheless been frequently interpreted in a way which is unhelpful for people with disabilities.

Tom Wright, whilst recognising the discipleship theme, disparages Bartimaeus' old life – it

30 Bevans, Models p.76 31 Bevans, Models p.76

32 Gerald West and Ujamaa Centre Staff, Doing Contextual Bible Study: A Resource Manual (The

Ujamaa Centre for Biblical & Theological Community Development & Research) Accessed online at

http://ujamaa.ukzn.ac.za/Libraries/manuals/Ujamaa_CBS_Manual_part_1_2.sflb.ashx on

12/1/2012

7

must be left behind instead of his playing the victim.33 Wright fails to acknowledge that, though Bartimaeus did experience marginalisation, lack of sight was not so much the cause as oppressive social norms and practices. Wright's associating resistance to being healed with the “selfish comforts of victimhood”34 can be most unhelpful to people who see their disability or impairment not primarily as a problem.

Ched Myers argues for reading the text parabolically – it is concerned with Bartimaeus' spiritual insight and willingness to follow over against the disciples' fear and resistance in their journey of discipleship.35 Whilst this approach sidesteps the problematic issue of healing it doesn't challenge the use of metaphor which associates blindness with ignorance.

A more positive reading of the text is possible. Despite maintaining the metaphor of “spiritual blindness”, Lamar Williamson argues that the text is as much, if not more, about the call to discipleship as about healing.36 Amos Yong recognises the nature of Bartimaeus' faith, persistence and tenacity as a central theme in the text which we must learn from.37 Additionally, Jesus can be seen to be treating Bartimaeus with respect and dignity, and acknowledging him as an independent self-aware subject.

Luke 24 & John 20:19-29 - Jesus’ Body

These texts are chosen to explore the idea of Jesus' resurrected body still bearing scars and whether this can be a helpful idea for people with disabilities. The theological significance of Jesus' scars as impairment receives little attention in commentaries, which tend to only comment on them as proof of the genuine resurrection of a crucified Jesus.38

However, several writers concerned with exploring disability see in this text a powerful example of God's identification with embodied human experience. The texts are cited by Nancy Eiesland who explores the idea of a “disabled God”, one particular aspect of her developing a liberatory theology.39 McCloughry and Morris, influenced by Eiesland, assert that “God…could not and cannot escape being disabled because of the physicality of his body…*This+ also applies to the exalted Christ. Christ has taken his experience up into God.”40

1 Corinthians 12 - The Church as the ‘Body of Christ’

This text lends itself to being read with a Disability Hermeneutic with positive results. Amos Yong argues that combining insights from Pentecostal theology with a Disability 33 Tom Wright, Mark for Everyone (London: SPCK, 2004) p.143 34 Wright, Mark for Everyone p.145 35 Ched Myers, Binding the strong man : a political reading of Mark's story of Jesus (Maryknoll, N.Y.: Orbis

Books, 2008) p.282 36 Lamar Williamson Jnr, Mark: Interpretation (Atlanta: John Know Press, 1983) p.197-8 37 Amos Yong, “Many Tongues, Many Senses: Pentecost, the Body Politic, and the Redemption of

Dis/Ability” in Pneuma: The Journal of the Society for Pentecostal Studies, 2009, Vol. 31 Issue 2, (Leiden, Netherlands: Brill, 2009) p.179

38 For example, David J Ellis, ‘John' in Ed. Howley, Bruce, and Ellison A New Testament Commentary (Pickering & Inglis, 1969) p.285-286

39 Eiesland, The Disabled God p.99-102 40 McCloughry & Morris, Making A World Of Difference p.69

8

Hermeneutic “can help us re-read St. Paul toward a more disability friendly and inclusive theology of the church”41

Whilst many churches are becoming increasingly aware of how to include people with disabilities in the activities they offer, Erik Carter believes that many fail to identify what such people have to offer the rest of the church.42 Studying 1 Corinthians 12 provides a way to discuss how this can be done so that the gifts of all people are valued and utilised for the good of the “body”. Developing ideas for practical action and change arising from this can be enriching for all people – not only those with disabilities.43

Methods Used for Studies

The group envisaged would include people with both hearing and visual impairments necessitating a multi-modal approach to exploring the texts. It would be highly desirable to have a interpreter to sign the stories and interpret discussion in British Sign Language, as well as the text being available in written form.

The stories of Bartimaeus and of Jesus' resurrection appearance could be dramatised by asking members of the group to act out the actions and read some of the words of the main characters. Physical objects which relate to the story, such as a cloak, a bowl, could be used to add an extra sensory dimension for those with visual impairments.

Participants would be encouraged people to approach the telling of the stories as an imaginative exercise, drawing on their own sensory experiences and abilities to reflect on aspects of the story: sights or sounds, smells or other sensations.

The following section provides suggested questions and structure for the studies, though should not be seen as rigid or exhaustive.

Study 1: Mark 10:46-52 Jesus & Bartimaeus

A Story

1. Begin with the retelling of the story.

Reflection

2. What is this text about?

In pairs, list the themes, ideas, or aspects which strike you as most significant. Share these with the whole group.

3. How have you heard or read this text interpreted in the past? What teaching point or theme has been focused on in your church or in another context you've experienced?

4. Reflect on any the connections you can make between this story and Mark 10:35-45.

41 Yong, “Many Tongues…” p.86

42 Erik W. Carter Including people with disabilities in faith communities : a guide for service providers, families, & congregations (Baltimore, Md.: Paul H. Brookes, 2007 ) p.13

43 Yong, “Many Tongues...” p.185

9

5. Jesus asks “what can I do for you?” Compare this with James & John’s request – what is asked for in each case and what is Jesus’ response?

6. How would you describe Bartimaeus’ character and manner? How do you think Jesus perceived him? How does this compare with James & John in verses 35-45?

7. Bartimaeus calls out but is silenced by the crowd (verse 48). Why do you think they did this? What was Bartimaeus’ response?

8. In what ways have you been prevented from communicating your needs, wisdom, insights or hopes within your church community?

9. How does Jesus react when Bartimaeus is silenced? What does this tell you about how Jesus viewed people with disabilities?

10. Focus on verse 52. What else might Bartimaeus have asked for? If he were alive in your community today, what might he ask for to enable his dignity and liberation?

11. Imagine you are being asked by Jesus “what can I do to enable you to be free, to be valued, to have equality?” How would you answer? What kind of things need to change within your church for the need you've identified to be met?

12. John Hull has suggested that in Jesus’ day and because of his culture “No apostle of Christ could be blind”44 and that Bartimaeus only followed Jesus after his sight was restored, not before. Do you think physical healing was necessary before Bartimaeus could or would follow Jesus?

13. Jesus says to Bartimaeus “Go your way”45 but Bartimaeus chooses to follow Jesus on his way – the way of discipleship. What obstacles do the church or do other Christians place in the way of you following Jesus and discipling other?

Action

14. What action do you feel summoned to in order to seek liberation and full equality for people with disabilities within your church community?

Study 2: Jesus’ Resurrected Body – Luke 24:36-43 & John 20:19-29

Your Experience

1. Share with another person in the group a time when particular attention was drawn to your impairment or disability by someone else. How did this feel? Was it a positive or negative experience?

Story

2. Listen to or read the two texts.

What are your immediate impressions after reading or hearing? Share these with another person in the group.

Reflection

44 Hull How I Discovered My Blind Brother p. 2

45 Translation from the Revised Standard Version

10

3. What is the cause of Jesus’ impairment? How are sin or evil involved?

4. Why do you think Jesus’ resurrected body still bore scars from being crucified and why did he draw attention to them?

5. Nancy Eiesland, a writer who has a disability, has said this about the text:

“In presenting his impaired hands and feet to his startled friends, the resurrected Jesus is revealed as the disabled God”46

What do you think and feel about the idea of God being disabled? Does it feel empowering, shocking, encouraging, strange or something else?

6. What do you think this text tells us about God, about our bodies and about how God sees our disabilities and our bodies?

7. How does your church speak about bodies and about Jesus’ body? Is this helpful?

Action

8. What insights can you share with the wider church that your experience of living with your particular kind of body has taught you – about God, faith, spirituality or living with God in the world?

9. Share any examples of language used about bodies in your church which is unhelpful, excluding or demeaning towards people with impairments or who experience disability.

How could you challenge this?

Study 3: “The Body of Christ” - 1 Corinthians 12

Your Experience

1. You may have experienced teaching about “gifts of the Spirit” or “Spiritual gifts”. What would you identify as your gifts – those God has given you which can benefit the church? Share this with another person in the group.

The Text

2. Listen to or read the two texts.

Reflection

3. How would you describe the characteristics of the “body of Christ” from this passage? What picture or description emerges?

4. What conditions are laid down for receiving different gifts – what determines the gifts and abilities members of the “body” possess?

5. What are the gifts given for?

46 Eiesland, The Disabled God p.100

11

6. “The weak” and “the strong” body parts in this passage are sometimes applied as descriptions of people with and without disabilities.47 What are some of the problems or advantages of this way of reading the text?

7. How do you think this text relates to the lay or ordained ministry of people with disabilities?

8. Share with the group what gifts you have to offer the wider “body” which you are currently not enabled or allowed to use.

9. What obstacles do the church or do other Christians place in the way of the discipleship of people with disabilities?

Action Planning using Talking Mats

To aid the process of developing an action plan, a tool called Talking MatsTM 48 could be utilised (see Appendix). Various church activities can be grouped using this visual, tactile tool according to whether they are currently inclusive and empowering for people with disabilities, and whether they are currently effective opportunities for the exercising of all people's gifts. A member of the church community who would run these studies is an accredited trainer in using Talking MatsTM and could facilitate this aspect of the studies.

Aspects of church life to be considered could include: liturgy, preaching, Eucharist, Children’s teaching groups, social activities or PCC meetings. Talking MatsTM would be used to evaluate, set priorities and form an action plan.

Conclusion This assignment has explored some ways in which a Praxis model can be utilised by people with disabilities as they encounter scripture, conscious of and confident in their value as whole people, as members of the body of Christ – a diverse body of differently-abled people. These studies are envisaged as the beginning of an ongoing process of reflection and action.

When adopting a Praxis model it is reasonable to ask: what concrete change will be effected? Such change might include more effective representation and participation in decision-making, or developing forms of worship which are more inclusive and which affirm the experiences of people with disabilities. The outcomes would hopefully be determined not by the able-bodied writer of this assignment but by those who wrestle with these texts and their own experiences in a quest for liberation.

47 Amos Yong “Disability and the Gifts of the Spirit: Pentecost and the Renewal of the Church” in Journal

of Pentecostal Theology 19 (Leiden, Netherlands: Brill, 2010) p.86 48 See www.talkingmats.com

12

Bibliography

Bevans, S B Models of Contextual Theology (New York: Orbis Books, 2002)

Burns, S , Slee, N and Jagessar, M The Edge of God: New Liturgical Texts and Contexts in Conversation (London: Epworth, 2008)

Carter, E W Including people with disabilities in faith communities : a guide for service providers, families, & congregations (Baltimore, Md.: Paul H. Brookes, 2007)

Cone, J H & Wilmore, G S Black Theology: A Documentary History (Maryknoll NY: Orbis Books, 1993)

Eaton Blair, C The Art of Teaching the Bible (Louiseville: Geneva Press, 2001)

Eiesland, N L The Disabled God: Toward a Liberatory Theology of Disability (Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1994)

Eiesland, N L & Saliers, D E Human Disability and the Service of God (Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1998)

Freire, P Pedagogy of the Oppressed (London: Continuum, 2000)

Gooder, P Searching for Meaning (London: SPCK, 2009)

Howley, Bruce, and Ellison (ed.) A New Testament Commentary (Pickering & Inglis, 1969)

Hull, J M “A Spirituality of Disability” in Studies in Christian Ethics, 2003, Vol. 16 Issue 2 (London: Sage Publications, Ltd., 2003)

Hull, J M How I Discovered My Blind Brother from The Bible in Transmission: a Forum for Change in Church and Culture [Bible Society], Spring 2004 (Paper provided by John M. Hull during M1 class, 23/11/11)

Hull, J M In The Beginning There Was Darkness (London: SCM, 2001)

Lewis, H Deaf Liberation Theology (Aldershot: Ashgate, 2007)

McCloughry, R & Morris, W Making A World Of Difference (London: SPCK, 2002)

Morris, W Theology without Words (Aldershot: Ashgate, 2008)

Murphy, J & Cameron, L Talking Mats: A Resource To Enhance Communication (Sterling University)

Myers, C Binding the strong man : a political reading of Mark's story of Jesus (Maryknoll, N.Y.: Orbis Books, 2008)

Pears, A Doing Contextual Theology (London: Routledge, 2010)

Swinton, J (ed.) Critical Reflections on Stanley Hauerwas' Theology of Disability: Disabling Society, Enabling Theology (New York: The Haworth Press, 2004)

West, G and Ujamaa Centre Staff, Doing Contextual Bible Study: A Resource Manual (The Ujamaa Centre for Biblical & Theological Community Development & Research) Accessed online at

http://ujamaa.ukzn.ac.za/Libraries/manuals/Ujamaa_CBS_Manual_part_1_2.sflb.ashx on 12/1/2012

13

Williamson Jnr, L Mark: Interpretation (Atlanta: John Know Press, 1983)

Wright, T Mark for Everyone (London: SPCK, 2004)

Yong, A “Disability and the Gifts of the Spirit: Pentecost and the Renewal of the Church” in Journal of Pentecostal Theology 19 (Leiden, Netherlands: Brill, 2010)

Yong, A “Many Tongues, Many Senses: Pentecost, the Body Politic, and the Redemption of Dis/Ability” in Pneuma: The Journal of the Society for Pentecostal Studies, 2009, Vol. 31 Issue 2, (Leiden, Netherlands: Brill, 2009)

Websites: www.talkingmats.com

14

Appendix: Talking MatsTM

Talking MatsTM is a “low tech communication framework involving sets of symbols” 49: a tool for enhancing communication for those who have a variety of communication difficulties. It is also useful for people without communication difficulties in a variety of applications. It has been described as a “tool to help people on their journey of decision making”50; in the context of these studies this decision-making centres on action to address barriers to equality and inclusion within the local church. The tool could be used to enable people to work out what is positive and empowering, what is excluding or degrading, and in forming an action plan. The tool has been used previously in a vast variety of contexts including:

consulting users of GP services

young people in social care and education settings

enabling people with dementia to participate in decision-making concerning their care and lives

people with learning disabilities

children involved in care proceedings

See www.talkingmats.com for further information and examples.

Examples of Talking MatsTM:

49 http://www.talkingmats.com/ Accessed 16/1/2012

50 Joan Murphy and Lois Cameron, Talking Mats: A Resource To Enhance Communication (Sterling

University) Booklet provided in Talking Mats Trainer's pack)