Written by Jose Malayang, Executive Minister of Local Church Ministries.
Our vision as a United Church of Christ is broad and has so many components-to become a multiracial, multicultural, open and affirming church, accessible to all. The last-named one universal accessibility-admittedly has just not been given enough emphasis and attention. We’ve been focusing on the exciting possibility of M and M (multiracial and multicultural, and expending energy on the controversial ONA (open and affirming), but we’ve not been paying enough attention to the A2A (accessible to all).
Previous writers of this column, including members of the Collegium, have rightly been affirming our denominational commitment to the particular vision of all-inclusive accessibility. More importantly, they have affirmed, with personal stories and experiences, their own beliefs in our ministry to, with, and for persons with disabilities, both in the United Church of Christ, in its various ministry settings, and in society at large. But we still have a long way to go. Too many churches in this land-United Church of Christ facilities included, of course-are unwelcoming or downright inhospitable to folks with disabilities (name any form of them).This attitude may not be intentional, though, on the part of some who are without the needed resources to make their buildings accessible.
I did a workshop once on a welcoming church. I focused on the topic of “walls” in our churches, walls we physically build, as well as nonphysical barriers we erect. The objective was to help the participants recognize and name barriers in their local churches that seem to say to people, both members and visitors alike, “You’re not really welcome here,” without really intending to say so. The group members also looked at numerous models of hospitality reflected in a number of Bible passages.
Participants were asked to identify both physical and nonphysical barriers in their churches. Accessibility was at the top of the list-the admission and recognition that most church facilities have sanctuaries, as well as other rooms in their church plants, that are simply not accessible, for example, narrow passageways and aisles, no elevators to or from fellowship halls, no accessible rest rooms, and no equipment for, or assistance to, the deaf or blind.
For some, an unwelcoming due is the absence of welcoming signs. Signage is important, both outside and inside the church building. My cousins related an experience of visiting a church in my city. They found the church all right, got into the building somehow-and proceeded to get lost inside. No signs inside the big building indicated how and where to find the sanctuary. Buildings should have clear signs inside as well as outside-to the sanctuary, the fellowship halls, church offices, classrooms, rest rooms- helping and informing people where to go and how to get there. It should be said here that many of our churches have become more and more accessible with elevators or similar mechanisms, equipment for the hard-of-hearing, large- print bulletins, and even copies of the New Century Hymnal in Braille.
Then there are nonphysical barriers-from theologies and ideologies to traditions-walls created by liberal or conservative labels or reputations, or a generational difference. (With regard to the last one, I remember visiting a church on the West Coast built primarily for retirees-very accessible, indeed, but with no rooms or facilities or programs for children! “Young families and children are not welcome here,” is what that church was saying loud and dear.)
There are other nonphysical barriers in our churches like praying the Lord’s Prayer only one way and turning others off. Or the prayer of our Lord, like the doxology, is not printed on the bulletin, making nonparticipants of “unchurched” people or those who have not been around for some time. I’ve heard of worshipers, even pastors, who refuse to come to a particular church that sings only from one particular hymnal-either because it’s old and obsolete, or it’s too new and has “strange” (usually meaning inclusive or different) language in it.
My family and I were in Chicago one summer many years ago to attend an alumni gathering and were invited to attend Sunday worship with a newly-gathered Asian congregation meeting in a chapel of a large inner city church. In the absence of directional signs, we found ourselves in the main sanctuary. The ushers of this non-Asian congregation (owners of the facilities) met us at the door and one of them said, “You7re in the wrong church,” and then directed us to the Asian congregations meeting place. Wrong church, indeed! An inhospitable, non- welcoming church it was, but sadly bearing the Name of the One who said, “Come unto me, all… ” or “make disciples of all nations.” A church that does not practice universal accessibility- and knows it!-is truly the “wrong church:’
A friend of mine from Toronto, Canada, a former seminary classmate from Indonesia, came to my installation in June 2000, in Cleveland. To mark the occasion, he gave me a gift, a book by Jean Vanier, Becoming Human. In a chapter titled “From Exclusion to Inclusion: A Path to Healing,” the author cites the story in Luke (chap. 16) about the poor man Lazarus and the unnamed rich man; after death, the former ended up with Abraham (heaven?) while the latter suffered in Hades. Separated by an economic chasm in human life, they were spatially separated in the afterlife.
The writer addresses exclusivism in human society: “There is an endless list of those whom we may exclude; every one of us, we may be sure, is on someone’s list: the homeless, the sick, the dying, the young, the old, the weak, the disabled, the stranger, and the immigrant, those with AIDS. . . .” Vanier writes of the fear of difference that leads to lack of concern about others who are dissimilar:
Who are the different? They are the people who suffer poverty, brokenness, disabilities, or loneliness. They cry out to us for help, these millions named Lazarus. Often, they five in discomfort while others live in comfort. Their cries become dangerous for those of us who five in comfort. If we listen to their cries and open our hearts, it will cost us something. So we pretend not to hear the cry and so exclude them.
But listen to their cries we must and open our hearts we will, even if it costs us something, as it should. Otherwise, it’ll cost us our faith, our witness, and our proper sense of humanity. And we don’t want that. The Local Church Ministries seek to partner with other settings of the church in listening to the cries for universal accessibility-and doing something about them. Multiple staff teams and various program units have in their mandates a ministry to, with, and for people with disabilities. Advocates, constituency groups, and members of our Boards of Directors add their “war cry” and hold us accountable to such a vital and urgent ministry. The mission imperative of becoming a church that is truly “accessible to all” is the ministry of all of God’s people. May it be so?
Sidebar: Indeed, there are many barriers or walls, both physical and nonphysical, in any given church that show it to be an unwelcoming place, intentionally or not. In a church that seeks to become an inclusive faith community, so much of what we are and what we do, unfortunately, excludes others, or says so, loudly or subtly without meaning to.
From UCC DM Newsletter Archive
