Summer Institute for Disability and Theology
Debbie Creamer, PhD
dcreamer@iliff.edu
July 16, 2012
* work in progress -- do not copy or quote without permission *
Some of you
know that my academic interests, for quite some time now, have focused on
rethinking and reclaiming disability from a theological perspective – and,
rethinking and reclaiming theology from a disability perspective – largely
through my proposal of the limits model, which I offer as a companion to models
of disability that focus on moral, medical, or social/minority lenses. I have suggested that, even as we push
against uncritical moral understandings of disability (that it is a curse or a
blessing, that we are victims or saints), even as we declare medical
understandings to be dangerously partial (we are more than body-machines with
parts that work and don’t work to greater or lesser extents), and even as we advocate
for the rights of people who experience discrimination and exclusion because of
the way society engages (or fails to engage) our perceived physical/cognitive/affective
differences, it is also important to realize that “people with disabilities”
are not the only ones who experience “impairment” or limits. In fact, as I have argued, limits are an
ordinary and unsurprising aspect of human life – disability is more “normal”
than normal, in that normal doesn’t really exist (or, at least, I’ve never met
a “normal” person), and at most any of us are temporarily able bodied. I
highlight the fact that all of us experience some limits all the time, and
perhaps it’s time for us to pay attention to which limits we label as normal
(e.g., that we can’t fly) vs. those that we consider to be disruptive (e.g.,
that I can’t run). These questions are
somewhat counterintuitive because we live and breathe these understandings of
what is “normal” and what isn’t, but you can get glimpses of the arbitrary
nature of our sense of limits when you think about how even our ideas of what
is and isn’t a disability change over time, or how we think it’s normal to
adapt for the impairment that some of us cannot walk to all the places we want
to go (and so we build cars, trains, planes, even space shuttles) but we do not
choose to adapt for the impairment that some of us can’t hear the audio in a
movie theater.
Even more
boldly, as a theologian, I have suggested that not only are limits an
unsurprising part of being human, but they are also intrinsic to our humanity,
and they are good (or, at least, not evil).
Yes, there are some limits that are dangerous or that we ought not
accept, and limits affect our lives in significantly different ways. I’m not arguing for a mushy sense of “we’re
all disabled,” but rather asking questions about how we live out our values as
we live into and out of our limits, and in particular, asking how we interpret
limits in light of our understandings of God, and how we think of God in light
of our experiences of limits. For
example, as I read Genesis 1, where God saw all that was created and called it
good – very good, in fact – and I see that every single one of us has limits, I
imagine that limits are not contrary to what is sacred and good. Or, I suggest that it’s not blasphemous to
consider a God with limits, and that limits might even connect to
characteristics of God that I would find valuable, such as perseverance,
interdependence, and creativity, things I often see grow out of experiences of
limits, which enables me to imagine the goodness of a God with limits. I don’t expect everyone to read the creation
story in Genesis the way I do, of course, nor to agree with my sense that God
might have limits – but I hope folks who encounter my work will at least pause
to think about what it might mean that we all experience limits and whether,
for example, that might help disrupt some of the us vs. them categories that we
tend to create around disability and non-disability, or might allow space for
new questions about what it is we deem to be “normal.” All of us have limits, and we would do well
to think theologically and ethically about these limits instead of trying to
pretend that they don’t or ought not exist.
Up til now,
in my academic work, I’ve largely talked about limits in general, or by
glancing at a very wide range of limits.
What I’d like to do this morning is share some of the ideas and
questions that I have been playing with recently as I focus specifically in on
chronic pain. Just as I have argued that
limits are not a defect from an ideal-normal human but rather are part of the ordinariness
and goodness of creation – and thus that disability isn’t a “problem” but
rather part of the beauty that appears in the diversity of humanity – I would
like to try on a perspective on pain that doesn’t immediately think of it as a
medical problem to be “fixed” but rather that considers pain to be part of the
beauty and scope of what it means to be human.
Let me say that again – my proposal today is that we try on a
perspective where, rather than viewing pain primarily as a negative, we instead
claim it appreciatively as part of the fullness of life and the goodness of
God’s creation, and even as an element of God’s own nature. As with limits, I don’t want to argue that we
should *not* be concerned with fixing or treating pain, but rather what I’m
proposing is that “how do we treat it” shouldn’t be our only question or
approach. This is a genuine work in
progress – what I’m presenting today is still somewhat new and experimental for
me – and so I invite your curiosity and reflections as well, and I look forward
to continuing this conversation in the workshop later today and throughout the
week.
I should
also say that I don’t take on this topic lightly, or strictly as an academic
experience. I live with chronic pain – I
have some degree of pain most of the time, and a lot of pain some of the
time. And this pain is chronic, which
means both that it is an ongoing part of my life, and also that it is not
easily linked to so-called physical causes.
It doesn’t show up as a clear defect on an x-ray or MRI, and it doesn’t
respond predictably to drugs or other interventions. To me, this is fascinating, even as it is
frustrating (and pain-full). I can’t
help but reflect theologically on it.
But aside from my self-curiosity here, I think chronic pain is
theologically interesting for at least two other reasons:
First, chronic
pain is an area of “disability” that hasn’t received a lot of attention, at
least within the academic study of disability and religion. As disability theology has expanded from its
initial focus on mobility differences, to include a wider range of human
experiences such as sensory difference, cognitive difference, and so on, I
think our theological work – as well as our work as humans – has become more
complex and messy, in the best way. I
hope that attention to chronic pain might offer a similar place of growth.
Second, chronic
pain is an area of “disability” that offers some really valuable challenges to
our existing models and understandings of disability. Pain is messy, it doesn’t connect neatly to
advocacy work, doesn’t connect neatly to social/minority understandings of
disability, and even medical-scientific understandings of pain keep shifting. As
Sharon Betcher notes, attention to pain move us beyond romantic or tidy notions
of the body into the chaos and anarchy of flesh, vulnerable and leaky and
messy, like “a teacup crackled with ten thousand veins.” And, as a theologian, I think pain raises a
lot of interesting questions about God and God’s relationship to the rest of
creation, in addition to what it raises about our relationships with ourselves
and each other. But we don’t ask these
questions, when we don’t claim our own interpretation of something, we leave it
for other people to interpret for us. So,
as someone who lives with chronic pain, I’d like to talk for a minute about
what pain looks like from various points of interpretation, and suggest why
these are inadequate, and then I’ll spend just a minute suggesting some
alternative points of access, which I hope we’ll continue to explore in this
afternoon’s conversations.
I usually
don’t tell people about my pain – not in general (just through this talk this
morning, I’ve probably tripled the number of non-medical people in the world
who know I live with chronic pain), and not even in detail to the trusted folks
who know I live with pain. I don’t often
tell them “this is a bad day” or “this is a good day” or “I hit an 8 on the
pain scale today” – good friends know anyhow, I suppose, because I limp or am grumpy
or spacy, or because they notice that I’ve made an extra effort to not limp or
act grumpy or spacy – but I don’t say it.
Why not? I think in part this is
because I grew tired of people telling me that they were sorry for me, or that
they found me to be brave or inspirational, or that God must know I can handle
it because God doesn’t give us more than we can bear (at which point, I often
hold back the desire to cuss vividly).
Or, while I don’t hear these words quite so concretely, I also notice
folks thinking that God gives us pain to teach us a lesson, to toughen us up,
or that pain is part of the Fall (women’s curse with childbirth and all), or
just the brokenness and partiality of human life, which will all be fixed (with
tears wiped away) in the life to come.
These are moral understandings – and while I don’t want to make the
argument here that any of these are wrong in and of themselves, my sense is
that people often offer these uncritically and in ways that are detached from
the rest of their belief system. Folks
who don’t believe in a God who chooses winning lottery numbers still seem to
think that there’s a God in the sky who picked me for chronic pain. Folks who emphasize the complexity and
interdependence of creation still see my pain as something uncomfortable and
wrong that needs immediate fixing (or, at least, for me to pretend that it’s
gone away). These are moral understanding
of pain, and they connect with other moral understandings of disability, where
if we don’t reflect on them, we carry them around without knowing them. And we internalize them, too. So partly I don’t talk about pain around
other people because I feel shame for my pain – and I don’t think that shame is
an unusual response to pain, which also comes from our moral understandings (or
misunderstandings).
I mentioned
that the “chronic” in chronic pain signifies two things for me – one is that it
is not an acute pain that appears and then eases predictably but rather is part
of “ordinary” ongoing life for me, and also that it is somewhat distinct from
what shows up during medical exams. And
so I begin to wonder if it’s all in my head – and that something that’s “in my
head” must be less right, less real than what my doctor can see, and so the
doctor becomes the expert of my body. It
strikes me as odd that we’re taught to trust the doctor more than ourselves in the
first place, but that’s for another time.
But even acute pain is something that makes little sense within a
strictly medical lens. At one level, it
makes sense to think of pain as a signal for a problem that needs to get fixed,
which could rest it neatly within a medical model that sees bodies as machines
that occasionally break down and need repair.
Pain is sometimes something like the car dashboard light that says
“service engine soon.” But it’s not neat
and tidy like a computerized diagnostic program. As Elaine Scarry (in The Body in Pain) and others have argued, pain is inexpressible,
something we cannot actually articulate to each other. It “shatters language,” she says. You have almost no way to know whether I am
in pain right now or I’m making all this up.
Perhaps you have seen pain scales, with the numbers 1-10, where a
patient is asked to rate how much pain she is in on a given day. The hope is that each of us can be at least
somewhat internally consistent – that a 5 for me one day is like a 5 another
day – but there’s no way of knowing whether a 5 for you is at all like a 5 for
me, and in fact it’s most likely quite different. Pain clinics these days often focus as much
on meditation and sleep habits as they do on drugs or medical
interventions. There’s a lot of
wonderful work being done on this, looking at pain management as the
intersections of science and art, or medicine and philosophy, but my main point
here is that pain isn’t really a simple medical issue, and that we shouldn’t
abandon our sense-making about pain a medical lens alone.
I could
talk for a minute about how the social model of disability engages pain, except
it simply doesn’t. This lens often
suggests that “disability” exists in architecture and attitudes, not in the
human body. There are ways in which social
framings do affect my pain-full body – staircases and uncomfortable chairs can
make my pain go up – but even the most perfect changes to attitudes and
architecture and social structures will never take away my pain. If anything, the social model attempts to
erase pain by ignoring it or treating it as irrelevant. This, too, is not a sufficient model for
understanding the human experience of pain.
I suppose
it’s not surprising that I think that something like the limits model offers
some possibilities here, particularly as we think theologically. Pain is interesting to me in part because
it’s a common human experience. We all
experience pain, in different ways during our lives, and we likely will
experience more pain the longer we live –whether that’s physical pain that
comes from arthritis or broken hips or other experiences that we think of as
being somewhat “normal” with aging, or whether it’s the kind of emotional pain
that comes from a longer life, with more space for grief and loss and regret –
and just as an aside there, I’m not sure I want to separate physical from
emotional pain, particularly as we know that “emotional” pain has physical symptoms,
and physical pain affects us emotionally.
But my point here is that, just as all people experience limits, we also
all experience pain, and it seems awkward and inconsistent that we tend to
define pain in contrast to life instead of understanding and embracing life and
pain as intertwined.
If we think about it, we don’t want
a life without pain. Pain tells us that
something is wrong – take your hand off of the hot stove, or stop riding your
bike when you have a torn hamstring. People
who live without pain live in great danger. Pain also tells us that something
matters – we feel genuine heartache at moments of great loss, our stomachs ache
when we are overwhelmed with stress. As
painful as all those things are, I would not want to be without them. Sometimes folks talk about “good” pain – the
pain that comes with happily tired muscles, or the sharpness and release that
comes with a good massage. Pain is
linked to pleasure, to sex and childbirth, to struggle and growth. It motivates us to speak out against
injustice, and becomes a way we embody our resistance to injustice. I wonder sometimes if we’d have a more just
world if those of us with privilege actually could feel the pain of the lives
we live and the ripples we cause, something more healthy than our tendency to
detach (or numb ourselves) from things like poverty, racism, and injustice.
Finally, I think I want a God who
feels pain – not just in a romanticized or symbolic way, but deep in God’s
body. A God who feels the pain, not just
observes or imagines it. And I suppose
that God would feel pain in a way that is chronic, with no end in sight and
with a scale that goes beyond measurable circumstances. Just
like Eiesland’s initial proposal of a disabled God, the idea of a God in pain is
not foreign to us -- those of us in the Christian tradition remember that Jesus
wept, and we can only imagine the physical and emotional pain of
crucifixion. Most traditions carry
stories that link pain with divinity, and all of our prophets and theologians
have known pain in their bodies, and known the world through their pain. If we can only encounter the world through
our bodies, and if our bodies regularly feel pain, then even the way we know
the world is affected by and grounded in pain. I even wonder if the incomprehensibility and unfathomability
of God is like the incomprehensibility and language-shattering nature of pain. If I cannot articulate my pain to you, no
wonder God, who must feel even greater pain than I do, is One who cannot be
fully articulated or known to me.
Pain is unsurprising, it is
intrinsic to what it is to be human, and it is good (or, at least, not evil). I
want to be a body who feels pain. I
embrace my chronic pain as part of who I am – yes, I like drugs and other ways
of easing it, but it offers me a lens to the world that is mine. I don’t know the world except through
pain. And I value the world I see this
way. It makes me pay closer attention to
the world around, even as it also gives me moments where all I can experience
is myself. I might even go a step
further than I have with limits to suggest that pain is, in some ways at least,
sacred. Here I don’t mean quite what
Ariel Glucklich describes, in his book called Sacred Pain, where he describes how and why folks sometimes engage
in self-harming as a way to reach the divine (fasting in the desert, pilgrims
taking on long journeys). I’m not
suggesting that pain leads us to the
sacred. No, I think I’m suggesting that
pain itself is sacred, particularly in the ways that it unmake us (a la Elaine Scarry)
and transgresses ordinary space and time.
And I don’t mean a romanticized sacred, either, or one that is pure and
perfect and up on an altar. But the
messy, down in the dirt, alive kind of sacred, thoroughly grounded in the
complexity of everyday real life and yet also breaking into our lives in ways
that thoroughly rupture them – completely unmaking us whether we like it or not
– but without such rupture we would perhaps never really feel or live or
grow. And perhaps we should be embracing
these moments of rupture, even rejoicing in them, even as we also struggle with
the pain in ways that refuse to romanticize or sterilize or passively accept
it. Yes, I think pain is sometimes the
“check engine” light, but as a theologian, my hope here is that it also is
something more.
For some of
you, chronic pain might make more sense as a sign of the brokenness of the
world, or the fallenness or frailty of human life. There are days I’ll agree with you. I’m not arguing against such interpretations
here, but rather want to highlight two main points. First, it wasn’t long ago that theology
considered all experiences of disability as brokenness and as contrary to God’s
plan. Disability was a defect. We think more complexly now, or at least ask
more questions. Just as we have come to think
of the full humanity and goodness of people who are Deaf or who have Down’s
Syndrome, I’d also ask us to reconsider our assumptions and prejudices about
the “wrong-ness” of pain. Second, given
that all of us experience pain some of the time, and some of us experience pain
all of the time, I’d ask that we not only look at how to fix it, but that we
also consider it as a source for knowledge, a way of knowing the world, and in
that way it is perhaps even part of the beauty of creation, the design of life,
the depth of the human experience.
Rather than trying to numb ourselves or erase our pain, I invite us to live
fully into our pain, to ground ourselves in our pain, to think about the ways that
pain is embedded and entangled in the goodness of life, to welcome the
ruptures, to dive deep into pain and find out what we can learn within it. At least, that’s what I’m playing with
today. I look forward to your thoughts.
Thanks for posting this Debbie. I miss reading your reflections and writing here. NancyR
ReplyDelete