what would be better? social role valorization and the development of ministry to persons affected...

7/29/2019 What Would Be Better? Social Role Valorization and the Development of Ministry to Persons Affected by Disability

1/13

THE IOURNAL OFTHE CHRISTIAN INSTITUTE

ON DISABILITY

Act ustll,Iouemerclandwalhhwmbfu ith tour God.Mrcau 6:8

Our missions to impaa tbeChurch,Christianandpwblicnstitwtions,nd societieswitb a biblicalworlduiew nd ife-giuingtruth

on ssuesertainingtohf., dig"itl, justice,and equalirythatffict peoPle uitb isabilities.

1 . NUMBEF 1 .2O12


2/13

ii/';" '..t:. .,:'..,, .,..'n'..'r"'.'. :,r..-.i,:.'. ...,,. ..,'".', .. .",

'i::," '..'t,.t,'

What Would Be BeLter?Social Role Valorization and the Development of

Ministry to PersonsAffected by DisabilityMenc TunrrNSKr eNn Ielr McNern

ABSTRACTThere is much that Christian churches can learn from relevant secularapproaches nd adapt o supporr ntegration and parcicipacionwithin ourcongregations or adults with impairments. One of these approaches sSocial Role Valorization developedby Dr. \X/olf X/olfensberger. n thisapproach,one considers he relevance f imageand competencyof deval-ued individuals and how these wo areasmpact accesso "the good thingsof life." This article applies heseprinciplesto the inclusion ofvulnerablecongregationalmembers nto the life of the Christian church, asking thequestion,"'What would be better?"asa prompt for those n leadership oreflect on their current practiceswith an eye oward maturity in their prac-tices as hey ntersect he livesof devaluedpeople. '

Keyword s: dkabili4t minktrJ, so ial role ualoriz"a.tion,inktrytmatwri9t

Marc Tumeinski, Ph.D., (candidate), is the Editor of the biannual SRV Journal and the TrainingCoordinator for the SRV mplementation Project. [email protected]

Jeff McNair, Ph.D., is the director of the Disabiliry Studies Program and the Moderate/SevereTeacher Credentialing Program at California Baptist University. [email protected]


3/13

INTRODUCTION

"por as many of you as were baptizedinto chrisr haveput on christ.r There s neitherJewnor Greek, here s neither slavenor free, here sneithermale nor female; or you are all one n christJesus" (G"l 3:27-2g).The Christian church hasa heighteningsense f awareness f individualswith characteristics hat aredevaluedby sociery particulady personswithsignificant physical and intellectual disabilities.Although there is stillmuch to be done, ncreasingly, hurchesare mounting efforts to specifi-cally reach out and include all members of rheir communities morebroadly,helping to build up the kingdom of God. churches can learn agreatdeal from relevantsecularapproachesand make adaptations ro sup-port integration and participation of adults with disabilitieswithin theircongregations.Social RoleValorizationA Comprehensive Set of Relevant and potent ToolsSocialRoleValorization (sRV)hasporential to help churches n this ongo-ing critical endeavor.SRV s aserof ideasbuilt on the premise hat ifwe canhelp people wirh disabiliries to have valued social roles, they will be morelikely to haveaccesso the good rhings of life. \x/olfensberger,who formu-lated SRV n 1983,defined t as:

The application of empirical knowledgeto the shaping of rhe cur-rent or potential social roles of a parq/ (i.e.,person, group, orclass)-primarilyby meansof enhancementof the party'scompeten-ciesand image-sothat rheseare,asmuch aspossible,positivelyval-ued in the eyesof the perceivers Wolfensberger& Thomas,2005).,,In Osburn's summary of SRV,he states,Thergfore, he major goal of SRV s to creareor support sociallyvalued roles or people n rheir society,becausef a personholdsvalued socialroles,rhar person is highly likely to receive rom soci-ety thosegood things in life thar areavailable o that sociery. nd

1?

that canbe conveyeding these....o mentibeingaccordeddigniran education, and th,tiesl a voice n the affituniries o parciciparrleastnormative placesupport. Osburn,20rWhy is this understan

our society or in any soc:typicalaccesso the good tsuch as amily, friends, hoa transcendentbelief syste7996).Given the predomdren and adulrs with signtend to be societallydevalfrom thesegood things, wBorrowing from JeanVarlikely harmful consequen,

Osburn (2006)goes(prescriptive p. 7). That iwhich typically lead to socon the basisof what onerealities.One'sactions carthese ndividuals. As anemphasize har adults witrather behavesn such a rdren, then one can expectdisrespected nd treated z

Although SRV s notoutcomesof societaldevation of whether one willsocialcontingenciesdescr

What are ndividual C\[/hat would be becrerUsing an SRVbaseda1

accesso the good things


4/13

N

have put on Christ.slave or free, here sJesus" Gal 3:27 28).f individuals

withthere is srill

efforcs o specifi-communities morecan earn a

ro sup-within their

What Would Be Better?

that can be conveyed y it, or at least he opportunities for obtain-ing these.... o mention only a few major examples, hey includebeing accordeddignity, respect,acceptance; sense fbelonging;an education, and the developmentand exercise f one's capaci-ties; avoice n the affairs of one'scommunicy and socieqy; ppor-tunities to participate; a decentmacerialstandard of living an atleastnormative place o live; and opportunities for work and self-support. (Osburn, 2005,p. 4)Why is this understanding relevant?At leastsomegroupsof people n

our society (or in any society)cannot take for granted that they will haverypicalaccesso the good things of life which many people ake for granted,such as farntly, riends, home, work, belonging, contribution, good health,a transcendent belief system,and so on (Wolfensberger,Thomas & Caruso,1996).Given the predominant values of our contemporary culcure,chil-dren and adults with significant physical andfor intellectual impairmentstend to be societally devalued,negatively perceivedand mistreated, cut offfrom thesegoodthings, which we all want (Wolfensber er,1.998, p.7 -1.1).Borrowing from JeanVanier, Wolfensberger 2000) refers o che all-too-iikely harmful consequences f socieraldevaluationas he 1Bwounds.

Osburn (2005) goeson to relate that SRV s descriptive ather thanprescriptive p. 7). That is, in observingsocial realitiessuch as practiceswhich typically lead to socialdevaluation)one candescribe ikely outcomeson the basis of what one doesor what one does not do in light of thoserealities.One's actionscaneither contribute to or counter devaluationofthese individua ls. As an example, Osburn states that if one does notemphasize hat adults with intellectual disabilities are ndeed adults, butrather behavesn such Lway as to imply that theseadults are really chil-dren, then one can expect o observe he likely resul t of suchadults beingdisrespected nd treated as children (p. 8).

Although SRV s not prescriptive, he empirical observationsof theoutcomes of societaldevaluation n the livesof realpeoplebegs he ques-tion of whether one will do something with the information abour thesocialcontingenciesdescribedn SRV.

What are ndividual Christiansand churchescalled o do?What would be better?Using an SRV-based pproach, he goal is to help devaluedpeople have

accesso the good things of life. For Christians his meanssuPporting an

n this ongo-hat ifwe can

they will be morewho formu-

of the cur-group, or

parr/s competen-osi ivelyval-

support sociallyf a person holdsrom soci-

sociecy, nd


5/13

. , C I D. The Jounnalof The Chr is t ian nst i tuteon Disabi l i ty

adult with physical and,/or ntellectual impairments to get and keepvaluedroles within a congregation as riend, member,minister, prayergroup par-ticipant, eldeq pastor,deacon, ector, teacher,usher,committee member,chaplain, steward,preacher,Bible study group member, worship leader,greeter, tc....Some of these olesarecomplementary-such aspastor andparishioner, ector and worshipperf'hearer'-andcan thereforemore easilybe built upon within existing congregationalpractices.

Wolfensberger 1998) states:Competenryand social mage orm avery powerful feedback oopthat can be either positive or negative ..As the competencies f aperson increase, he person's mage improves; n [urn, a personwho is positively imaged is more likely to receivepositiveexpectan-cies,positivemodels,opportunities for skill improvement)etc.,al lof which contribute to greatercompetency p.7+).Therefore,goals or church ministry for adults with disabilities might

take into account both image and competencyenhancementconsidera-tions (Wolfensberger& Thomas, 2007). We will consider each of theseavenuesbelow.lmage ConsiderationsImage n this context relates o the mental pictures we hold in our mindsabout other people(Wolfensberger,1998, . 63).A1lkinds of imagescansend messages bout vulnerable people to ochersand to the individualsthemselves.Probabilistically, and particularly in combination) theseimageswill have an effect on whechervulnerable people are treated posi-tively or negativelyby others. Positive mages and messages ill invite oth-ers to seevulnerable people n a more positive light, and thus predicatethe extension of Christian fe llowship, in addition to all the other goodthings that can comewith belonging to a church.

According to Wolfensberger 1998), magescan also mpact the deval-ued person's nternal unders tanding of their own perceived alueto thecommunity, to the chu rch and even o God (pp.22-2a).Positive magesdevelopedby persons about themselves an reinforce their own per-ceived ntrinsic value; n a sensecommunicating to people who havebeenwounded that although they maybe devaluedby their sociery theyare of inestimableworth to God. Thesenotions qrow out of a biblical14

understandingof humarthe Church) and of God.

Such mage consideraships, olesand activities,;pp.6a-69).Let us considereflect on the current exFgregation.With that in n"V/hat would be better?"

Setting: WolfensbergA seming anconveyra setting will cast rs tcomfortable, has a hiposes,and is next to (other hand, settings raredecrepir, gly, n uother places hat peolThe following are qu

intersecrion f imageanc' Do the settingswhr

their time look likemination, one shoretc. magine a naiveing who spends imtively of the people'. Do the settings whmostof their t imeConsider design,ftobserver ooking atple who spend imwould be better?

' Is the time of assenm.ost f their time ;membersassembleSunday morning, athe samecimeand 1


6/13

on Disabi l i ty

to get and keepvaluedprayergroup par-committee member,

worship leader,as pastorand

more easily

oopf an turn, a person

expectan-nt,etc.,al l

with disabilities mightconsidera-

consider each of these

we hold in our mindskinds of imagescanand to the individualscombination, these

are reacedposi-ill invite oth-

and thus predicateto all the other good

mpact the deval-to the

22-2\. Positive magesnforce their ow n per-who have

by their society, heyout of a biblical

What Would Be Better?

understanding of human beings,of the Body of Christ (asa metaphor forthe Church) and of God.Such mage considerations nclude questionsrelatedto setting, relation-ships, olesand activicies, nd miscellaneous rnagery cf Wolfensberger,1998,pp.6a-69). Let us considereachof thesebriefly. The reader s encouragedoreflect on the current expressionof each variable in their own church con-gregation. With that in mind, they are then encouraged to ask themselves,"W'hat would be better?"

Setting: Wolfensberger 1998)staresabour settings:A setting canconveyimages bout the peoplewho use t. For instance,a setting will cast ts users n a positive light if it is nicely decorated,comfortable, has a history of being used for positively valued pur-poses,and is next to other places hat people view positively.On theother hand, settingswill cast a negative mage on their users f theyare decrepic, gly, in undesirableneighborhoods and next or near toother places hat people do not want to be next or near to (p. 6a).The followir,g arequestions o provide initial guidance relative o the

intersectionof image and setting.Do the settingswherevulnerable church members spend ncost fcheir time look like qrpical church settings? n making this deter-mination, one should consider design, urnishings, decorations,etc. magine a naiveobserver ooking at thesesettings and guess-ing who spends ime in them. Would they be likely to think positively oFthe peoplewho usechese ettings?What would be better?Do the settings where vulnerable adult church members spendmost of their time look like places where adults spend time?Consider design, urnishings, decoracions)etc. Imagine a naiveobserverooking at thesesettingsand guessing he ageofthe peo-ple who spend time in them. Would they guess"adults"? W'hatwould be better?Is the time of assemblywhen vulnerab le church members spendmostof their time at church the same time tha t typical churchmembers assembleat church? If the main worship time is onSunday morning, are the vulnerable church members present atthe same ime and olace?What would bebetter?


7/13

J C I D . The Journal of The Chr is t ian nst i tuteon Disabi l i tv

Relationships: wolfensberger (1998) srares hat imagewill alsobe pro-foundly affectedby the people wirh whom thar party is associated, s cap-tured in the folk phrase har peopleare "judged by the companytheykeep,,(p.6+).The followingquesrions anguideus n consideringhe nterseccionof imageand relarionships.. Do r,ulnerablechurch membersspendrnostof their church timemixing in and participating with a broad specrrum of otherchurch members,acrossall agesand abilities?Are we avoiding(evenunintentionally) or reinforcing negativesrereorypes,uchas hat "thosepeopleonly belongwith rheir own kind,, or ,.thosepeoplearehappierwith their own kind',?Are vulnerablechurchmembersbeing chosenas friends ro rhe samedegreeas otherchurch members?What would be better?

Roles and activities: \x/olfensberger1998) ndicatesrhat "peoplewill alsobe magedby the acrivities, chedules nd other routines n which theyareengaged" p. 6S). Because significant component of church strucruresinclude the activitiesdevelopedby the congregation(e.g.,worship, Biblestudy, outreach, formation and education, etc.)as well as the rolespeopletake on within thoseactivities choir member,Biblestudy leader, eacher,student, etc.), he following quesrionsareprovided ro guide in facilitatingdesirable olesand acriviries.. Are the rolesand activities in which vulnerable church members

spend n'r.ostf rheir time the samekinds of rolesand activities inwhich mosr church membersengage? o the r,rrlnerable hurchmembersengage n theseroles and activities at rhe same ime, inthe sameplacesand with a broad rangeof other people,parric-ularly peopleclose o their own age?What would be better?Miscellaneous mageryWolfensberger 1998)alsocautions rhac,

Imagesare alsoconveyedby chenamesof services, f serviceset-tings, ofvarious services racticessuchas ts programs and activ-ities, and of irs servers.A servicewhich has a culturally valuedand otherwise positively-imaging name will be more enhancing

IO

for its recipients han cing n ame" (p.66).

Questions about languagetion of vulnerablepeopleaserved.

' In our spokenand wrrespondence, ur chuqypical, espectful,agnerablechurch memt

, in our languageuse?common? How woul,theseways?What wo,

CompetencyConsideratioBy competencyconsideratintellectual abilities aswellciplines(Wolfensber er,19webelieveall people can eament are a natural part o.beings.Lesser ompetencyin another area,often witlcan open the door ro incrrvalued social roles and an ersatisfaction n life. Our ainious competencies,articuparticipation.

This begs hequescionUsing the body metaphor,not competent as an ear.Orrl:'a:y ppearquite limited i:entire body. Yet, the toe a:Corinthians 12:1states, Tsideredseparatelym&y "seet12:22). The eyecannot say12:2I). Competence houlta whole body and the whc


8/13

Disabi l i ty

will also be pro-s associated, scap-e company hey keep"he ntersecrion

church cimeof otheravoiding

stereotypes, uchor "those

churchdegreeas other

"peoplewill alsothey are

structures(e.g.,worship, Bible

well as he rolespeopleeader, eacher,

coguide n facilirating

church membersand activities in

vulnerable churchsame ime, n

partic-be better?

serviceset-an d acriv-

more enhancing

What Would Be Betten?

for its recipients han onewhich hasa peculiar or evenstigmatiz-ing name" (p. 66).Questions about language and naming can guide us in the characteriza-tion ofvulnerable peopleand the manner in which they are ncluded andserved.

' In our spokenand written language,our conversations, llr cor-respondence, ur churchbulletins,sermons,etc.,do we use aidyqrpical,respectful, age-aPProPriate anguage to and about vul-nerablechurch members?Are webeing truthful aswell as ovingin our language use?Are we emphasiztngwhat we all share incommon? How would I feel f I were spoken o or referred o intheseways? X/hatwould be better?

CompetencyConsiderationsBy competencyconsiderarions,we broadly include physical,social andintellectual abilities aswell asrelated skills, habits, motivations, and dis-ciplines(wolfensbe ger,1998,p.70).Do our church practices eflect thatwe believeall peoplecan earn,and that learning and competenryenhance-ment are a narural part of life? This is part of how God made humanbeings.Lesser ompetency n one areacan frequently be compensated orin another area,often with help from other peoPle.GreatercomPetencycan open the door to increased ocialstatus,more oPPortunities,morevaluedsocialrolesand an enhanced mage,possiblyeven eading to greatersatisfaction in life. Our aim is to help adults with disabiiities grow in var-ious competencies, articulady those related o church membership andparticipation.

This begs he questionof competencyacross he largerBody of christ.Using the body metaphor, etoe rrL1y e competent as a toe;however, t isnot competent as an ear.One thereforehas a purposewithin oneselfwhichmay appearquite limited in comparison ro the combined purposeof theentire body. Yet, the toe and ear are critical elementsof the body. As 1corinthians 1-2:1-tates, The body is a unit." Parcsof the body when con-sideredseparatelymay "seemweakerbut are ndispensable"(L Corinthians1,2:22)..,Theyecannot sayco he hand,'I don't needyou!"' (1 corinthiansl2:2I). Competenceshould be consideredon a macro level n relation toa whole body and the whoie body's PurPose.My role as a "toe" or "e&t"


9/13

J C I D . The Journal of The Chr is t ian nst i tuteon Disabi l i tv

may not appearparticularly worrhy of specialaftention; however, f I amseeing he toe in reladon to the whole body,my perspecrive hanges. heintersection of comperencyand image s critical for rhe church ro reflectin its interactions with adults who have mpairments. This macro/wholebody notion also has porenrial to deepen he Judeo-Christian notion ofbeing created n the image of God, within congregarions.As above, hesecompetencyconsiderations nclude questions elatedto setting, relarionships,rolesand activities,and miscellaneouscompe-tency. Let us consider each of these briefly. The reader is once againencouraged o reflect upon rhe current expressionofeach variable n theirchurch, consider he specificvariableprovided n rhequesrions hat inter-sectswith competency, nd to ask themselves,V/hat would be better?,'

Sewing' Are the church settingsphysicallycomforrable,easilyaccessible,welcoming and useable y peopleof all agesand abilities?Whatwould be better?. \X/hac o church semings eflect about rhe body's competencyasa unit? Is mutual dependency eflected n church structuresandsettings? K/hatwould be better?' Does he church setting's scructures" sound,materials,strate-gies, seating,programs, sight lines and visibiliry, access, tc.)enhance he competenry of vulnerablechurch members? X/hatwould be better?

Relationships. \X/hatdoesour sharedvision of Chrisrian community look like?\X/ho s presenr n our biblical vision of communiry? How canthe inclusion ofr,rrlnerablepeoplebemer eflect rhe Gospelvisionand thereforestrengthen our church communiry? How can wemore closely approach this vision here and now wirhin ourchurch?Given he acrualmakeup of our membership,might weunintentionally or unconsciouslybe purring somegroups ofpeopleoutsideof chisvision?Whar would be better?' The Christian walk is a communal walk-with family, fellow dis-ciples,and our brothers-and sisters-in-Chris t.Wearenot meant

18

to faceour joys or ourporting families and s:with r.rrlnerablechurclcelebrationand mutu,

' Whenvulnerablechurmembers, re hey n:coming size?Doesanya chance o contributWhat would be bener

' Are vulnerable churchenjoyable elationshipmembersof all agescomed and nurturediknow this is happenir

' What are someof thespendtime with each(e.g., isiting one anoling, etc.)?How are vrer'gage n these roleswith a broad range o{close o their own agebersbeingchosenas ibetter?

Rolesand activities' Do vulnerablechurck

class"of "lesser"churrand activities commusomething other tharroles and activitieswould be better?

' What is entailed n beany Christian forms(new) church membunreasonable arrielrndf or intellectual incoming aswe remain


10/13

however, f I amhanges. hefor the church to reflectThis macro/wholenodon of

quesrions elatedmiscellaneous ompe-reader s once againofeachvariable n theirthe questionsha t inter-would be betcer?,,

asily ccessible,and abilities?\X/harcompetency sstructuresand

materials,strate-access, rc.)members?Whac

like?How canhe Gospelvision

How can wenow within ourmighrwesome groups of

family, fellow dis-trVearenot meant

to face our joys or our struggles alone. In what ways are we sup-porting familiesand small groups to come ogetheraround andwith vulnerablechurch members: n prayer,worship, ellowship,celebrationand mutual aid/support? W4ratwould be better?' When vulnerable church membersspend time with other churchmembers,are hey in groups that are of a comfortable and wel-

coming size?Doesanyone eel overwhelmed?Doeseveryonehavea chance o contribute, and feel comfortable in contributing?V4rat would be better?' Are vulnerable church members forming genuine and mutually

enjoyable relationships as well as friendships with other churchmembersof all agesand abilities? Are such relationships wel-comed and nurtured? How so?W'hat signswillwe look for toknow this is happening?What would be better?. V/hat are some of the ways that our church members q,picallyspend ime with eachother oucsideof the formal church setting(e.g., isiting one another's homes, Bible study, prayer, ocializ-ing, etc.)?How are vulnerable church members supported toengage n these roles and activities outside the church settingwith a broad rangeoFocherchurch members, ncluding peopleclose o their own age? Once again,are vulnerable church mem-bersbeing chosenas riends by qpicalmembers? What would bebetter?

Boles and activities. Do vulnerablechurch membersperceive hemselves s"second-

class"or "lesser"church members? n whacwaysdo existing rolesand activities communicate to r.rrlnerablemembers that they aresomething other than rypicalmembers? s therea reason or theroles and activities as clrrrently designed to continue? \X/hatwould bebetter?. \Vhat s entailed n becominga member of this church?Are thereany Christian forms of initiation used? X/hat s expectedof a(new) church member? Do any of these expectations createunreasonablebarriers to membership for those with physicalandfor intellectual mpairments?How can we be evenmore wel-coming aswe remain true to our faith?


11/13

The Journalof The Chnist iannst i tuteon

' How do church s_rrucruresnd practicesacknowredge nd uci-rize the gifts of alr church -"-t"rr, incruding thosl memberswith physicaland intellecrual impairments? Do our structuresreinforcenotions ofindepend".r." o, that we aremembersofaninterdependent body? Do our strucrures,sched.ules, racrices,worship, prayer, eadership, membership, erc., -"i.o_" ,rdnourish peoplewirh physicaland intellectual disabilitieseven ncaseswhere t can bephysically,emotionally andf orinrellectuallychallenging? f exclusions,exceptior^ o. .o_pro_ir., "r" .rrra",why are hey made and wherei How long will such exclusions,exceptions andfor compromises conrinue? How will we movecloser owardour shared. ision oFchrisrian communirv?Howcan we come rogether co support one anorher througir thesechallenges: he vulnerable person,rheir famity and frienis, orherchurch members?. V&ar signsofgrowth in faith do weseeamong church members?Does he presence f devaluedpeople mpact the understandingof how faith development s carriej out for all congregants?Howis ou r church co lchrisdanif.?wh;T;;'yb:;:#'"- all membersn rheir' \xzha1are the typicar erements of adurt faith formation withinour church? ,Vhatimpacr doesrhe presence f devaluedpeople-1"1" " rhe way faith development is undersrood in o.rr.i,rr.hewho leads heseefforts?who participates n them? x/hat earn-ing and growth opportunities d.owe make available? vhere dothey takeplace?Whar learning materialsareused.?s anyonenorparticiparing solely or primarily becauseof an impairment?What can we do about rhac?' over time, arevulnerable church members taking on newvaruedroles(e.g.,member, minister, prayergroup -"_b"., eld.er, as_toq deacon,ector, eacher, sher, o*-iti"" member,.hrpl"i.r,steward,preacher,Bible study group member, worship leader.greerer,erc.)within rhe church?How are they contributing tothe life of their church communiry? What would be bemer?' Does he church'scorevarues nd missionadequarely eflect hechange equiredfor the church ro more furly incruie memberswhom societyhas devalued?Does the church engage n reflec_tion and sel'evaluarion regarding he participatron of devarued

people n the ife anthe church collect Ision of including dtSummary rom a ChristiCertain roleswithin a chror ascribed \{/olFensberghas done (and can do n,Examples nclude:bearerthe Body of Christ (1 Co3:16), nd so on. Suchchrsecular olesof member ,member of the Body of C

, nectedness ith orher Chbe a church.Perceived oralsocome rom an underrrural replacement arratirtioned roles. X/herher thascribedor attributed rolthe realiryof these oles.Chrisdans and congregatand children rhar socierydone to help adrrltswithThe practiceof baprismthese oles.We recognizebearerof the Image of G


12/13

and uri-rhosemembersDo our structuresaremembersof anractices,etc.,welcome anddisabilities even nandfor intellecruallyaremade,such exclusions,How will we move

communiry? Howthrough theseand friends, othermembers?the understanding

l congregants? owmembers n theirormacionwirhinofdevalued people

n our church?them?What learn-Wheredoused?s anyonenotan impairment?

on newvaluedelder,pas-member, haplain,worship leader,contribudng ro

be better?eflect theinclude membersengage n reflec-of devalued

people n the life and ministry of the church?What evidence anthe church collect for itself to gaugeprogress owards its mis-sion of including devaluedpeople?What would be becter?Summary rom a ChristianPerspectivecertain roleswithin a church or congregationcan be assigned, mributed-or ascribed Wolfensberger, ggB, . 31),evenwhen the person n rhe role -has done (and can do nothing) to warrant the role or ro carry ir out.Examples nclude:bearerof the Image of God (Genesis1:21),member ofthe Body of Christ (1 Corinthians L2), one for whom Christ died (|ohn3:16),and so on. Such church and congregation olesgo beyondeven hesecular olesof member or citrzen.Being seenand perceivedas a fellowmember of the Body of Chrisr reflectsan inhe;ent dignity and intercon-nectedness ith other christians that lies at the hearr ofwhat it means obe a church. Perceived omperence nd similariry to ochersmay thereforealso come from an understanding of the biblical narrative as a social/cul-tural replacementnarrarive,simplywith the attribution ofthe abovemen-tioned roles.Whether other church membersembraceandact upon theseascribedor attributed roles n avd.orizins fashion in no wav diminishesthe realiryof these oles.However, here Jmuch thar can b"ion" to helpChristians and congregarionsgenuinely exrend hese roles o rhe adultsand children that societyhas devalued.There is also much that can bedone to help adults with impairments themselves o take on these oles.The practice of baptism for exampleseems super) naturally fitted forthese oles.We recognizeof course hat the nature of one's dentiry as abearerof the Image of God goes ar beyond rhe human realityof socialroles;nevertheless,we are focused n this article largely on what a churchcongregationcando to extend and deepen ts mission to and with adultswith impairments.

CONCLUS IONImageand competencyenhancement areby no means he only foci to beconsideredwhen attempting to influence church practices n regards oadults with impairments. Howeveq rhe application of theseSRV criteriaprovides an empirically basedstarring point from which to proceed. Viththe help of God'sSpirit, genuinereflection on, "Whar would be better?"carrhelp move ndividual Christians and congregarionsn a positivedirection


13/13

Th e Journal of The Chnis t ian nst i tuteon Disabi l i tv

in a non-threatening manner.The assumptionof phenomenologicalreflec-tion dispels he notion of a processwith an endpoint, implying instead hatthere is only ongoing movement through a processof mutual growrh."For just as he body is one and hasmany members,and all the membersof the body, though many are one body, so it is with Christ. For by oneSpirit we wereall baptized into one body-Jewsor Greeks,slavesor free-andall weremade o drink of one Spirit. "For the body doesnor consisrof onemember but of many'' (1 Cor. 12:12-74).

REFERENCESOsburn,J.Q0O6).An overviewof SocialRoleValorization theory.TheSRVJournal (1),4-13.Wolfensberger,W. (1998).A briefintroduaion oSocialRoleValorizatnn:high-

ord,er onceptfor ddressingtheligbtofsocietal$deualaedpeople,ndfor strwc-twring bum.an eruices3rd ed.). Syracuse,NY: Training Institute forHuman ServicePlanning, Leadershipand Change Agenrry (SyracuseUniversity).Wolfensberger, .&Thomas, S. 2005). ntrodaaorySocialRoleValoizannnwork-shop rainingpa,ckage. yracuse,NY: Training Instirute for Human ServicePlanning, Leadershipand ChangeAgentry (SyracuseUniversity).Wolfensberger,W. and Thomas, S.(2007).PASSING. toolfor analjtztngerueqwalityaccordingtoSocialRoleValorization iteria. Ratingsmanual (3rd reu.ed.). Syracuse,NY: Training Institute for Human Service Planning,Leadershipand Change Agentry (SyracuseUniversiry).Wolfensberger,'W.,homas, S.& Caruso,G. (1996).Someof the universal'good things of life' which the implemenrarion of Social RoleValorization can be expected o makemore accessibleo devaluedpeo-ple. The nt emational Social RoleValorizatioJoumal,2(2 , 12 14.

For more information on Social Role Valorization and PASSING,pleasevisit www.srvip.org.22

BeyonAn Ethic of

The Gospels nclude accoof disabilities. Contempfocus on the aspectofplcteate a church culture ttreating them primarily aan alternative approach tindividual and social as1appliesWilliam Spohn'stexts rom the Gospeloldiversescholars Kathy Bresult is an ethic of healiindividualistic notion ofand exclusionarycommu

Keywords: com',

Br

Bethanv McKinnev is a doctoral c.

what would be better? social role valorization and the development of ministry to persons affected...

Documents