A Church of All: Persons with disabilities – Imago Dei
21 October 201522. In the history of Christian theology, the notion that humanity is made in the image of God has tended to mean that it is the mind or soul which is in God’s image, since the bodily (corporeal or physical) aspect of human nature can hardly represent the incorporeal, spiritual reality of the transcendent God. We should not underestimate the profound reaction against idolatry in early Christianity; no animal or human form should be taken to represent God who is invisible. However, the perceived kinship between our minds and God’s Mind (or Logos), coupled with the assumed analogy between the incarnation of God’s Logos in Christ and the embodiment of the (immortal) soul/mind in the human person, encouraged a predominantly intellectual interpretation of how human beings are made in the image of God.
23. This tendency may at times have permitted the positive acceptance of intelligent persons with physical disabilities: e.g., Didymus the Blind (4th century) was nick-named Didymus the See-er because he saw more profoundly than those with physical sight. It has also encouraged positive (if somewhat patronising) responses to persons with profound and multiple disabilities on the grounds that “you can see the soul peeping out through their eyes”. But this understanding of human nature is both inherently elitist and dualist. It ultimately tends to exclude those whose mental or physical incapacities profoundly affect their entire personality and existence.
24. More recently, the notion that humanity is made in the image of God is taken to mean that each of us is made in the image of God and, therefore, each of us deserves to be equally respected. It conspires with modern human rights ideologies to encourage individuals to assert their right to a decent deal in society, and to recognition of each person’s inherent dignity, no matter what his/her race, religion or impairment.
25. This tendency has had a positive impact in encouraging respect for those who are not white, male, able-bodied and intelligent. But it has also exacerbated the prejudice that we should all be perfect since we are made in God’s image. Obvious failure to reach such notional perfection then becomes problematic. How can this person, who apparently has physical or mental defects, be made in God’s image? The modernist rights approach may challenge the attitudes of some past traditional societies, but the success-oriented values of modern individualism encourage an interpretation of imago Dei which, we would argue, does not take account of core elements in Christian theology.
26. The phrase we are examining occurs in the Genesis narrative of the creation of Adam. So there are two important features that need to be taken seriously: firstly, Adam represents the whole human race. The very name Adam means man-humanity in the generic sense, for the creation of Eve from his rib represents sexual differentiation in the human race. Secondly, while Adam was indeed made in the image and likeness of God, this was marred by his disobedience, classically known as the Fall. Some early theologians suggested that he retained the image but lost the likeness. The point here is that glib theological talk about being made in God’s image needs to be countered with a sensitivity to thecorporate nature of that image, and the fact that all have fallen short of the glory (image) of God (Rom 3:23).
27. For the Christian community, this reflection on Genesis 1 is confirmed by the New Testament. A reading of Paul’s Epistles soon shows that the dynamic of salvation depends upon the parallel between Adam and Christ. Adam is the “old man”, Christ the “new man” (Rom 5:2, 2 Cor 5:17), and all of us (male and female) are in Adam and potentially in Christ (Romans 7, 1 Cor 15:22). Both are in some sense corporate figures. In Christ we are a new creation, but as in Adam all die, so in Christ all will be made alive. In a sense, Christ alone is the true image of God; the image of God in Adam (the old humanity) was marred. So we are in God’s image because we are in Christ.
28. If Christ is the true image of God, then radical questions have to be asked about the nature of the God who is imaged. At the heart of Christian theology is a critique of success, power, and perfection, and an honouring of weakness, brokenness and vulnerability.
29. Being in Christ is being in the Body of Christ. This is essentially a corporate image; a body is made up of many members, all of whom bring different contributions to the whole (1 Cor 12, Romans 12). Indeed, the weak limbs (members), and even those body parts we are ashamed of and cover up (see the Greek of 1 Cor 12:23), are indispensable and are to be especially honoured, their essential contribution recognised. Furthermore, this is a physical image, and the physical reality was that in His bodily existence, Christ was abused, disabled, and put to death. Some aspects of God’s image in Christ can only be reflected in the Church as the Body of Christ by the full inclusion and honouring of those who have bodies that are likewise impaired.
30. We would therefore argue that:
Christian theology needs to interpret the imago Dei from a Christological and soteriological (the saving work of Christ for the world) stand-point, which takes us beyond the usual creationist and anthropological perspectives.
Christian theology needs to embrace a non-elitist, inclusive understanding of the Body of Christ as the paradigm for understanding the imago Dei.
Without the full incorporation of persons who can contribute from the experience of disability, the Church falls short of the glory of God, and cannot claim to be in the image of God.
Without the insight of those who have experience of disability, some of the most profound and distinctive elements of Christian theology are easily corrupted or lost.
31. “When any one of us, or a group of us, is excluded because of some lack of ability, we are prevented from using our God-given gifts to make Christ’s body complete. Together, let us make the beautiful mosaic that God intends.” (Norma Mengel on mental illness)
32. The study of the Bible as the source of Christian theological reflection and as the revelation of the purpose of God, and the knowledge of the Creator, leads us to the certainty that we have accepted and been accepted by a God of Love. It is God who encourages us to live in the light of his Son with our errors, afflictions and disabilities. The prophet Isaiah points to the One who carries all our afflictions (Is53:4-6). The God “who shows no partiality” (Gal 2:6), includes everyone in His bosom, male or female, whatever their physical or mental conditions.
