Condiciones Geográficas

Eiesland (1994: 89-90) Christologically reveals the metaphors of her powerful vision of the image of God which perfectly portrays the symbol of disability. She sees God as a disabled God, who does not reveal His omnipotence and self-sufficiency or deserve pity as a suffering servant. The image of God is a God who is embodied in the image of Jesus Christ, the disabled God.

Fast (2011: 421) concurs with Eiesland’s metaphor as revelatory of the ideal image of the disabled God. Eiesland reasons that it is liberating, because the symbol portrays the disabled God as one who loves all human beings, including persons with disabilities, but the image of the disabled God is a God who is embodied in the image of Jesus Christ, the disabled God (Eiesland, 1994: 90). However, Fast has a contrary understanding of the re-symbolisation of God as disabled. She contends that Eiesland moved beyond incarnational solidarity with disabled human beings and allows the incarnational promise to expand and include a focus on solidarity with this disabled God (Fast, 2011: 421). Swinton adds that “God is in solidarity with humanity at its most fundamental level, in weakness and brokenness” (Swinton, 2011: 292). Nonetheless, Fast claims that Eiesland seems to miss what truly gives liberation, arguing that mere solidarity does not liberate as it should, but the cross does, for the cross gives direction to resurrection. She criticises Eiesland’s move from the incarnation directly to the resurrection in her theological approach to disability, arguing that Eiesland moves right up to the threshold of this emancipatory power, but fails to go through the door. In other words, Eiesland tugs at the end of the red thread but fails to weave it into the fabric of her own liberation theology of disability (Fast, 2011: 421).

Eiesland’s symbolic image of the disabled God caused me to take a second look at the notion that human beings are created in the image of God and that we all bear our identity as made in the image of God, who is ultimately the source of our existence and the redeemed life through Jesus Christ, who is God incarnate (Cornwall, 2015: 110). This reality broadened my understanding of the image of God and that humanity was created in His image. I wish I had this understanding before the death of my disabled younger sister who passed away in 2015 without receiving support to help her find her identity as one created in the image of God, simply because I was ignorant of the image of the disabled God, whose symbolic image gives liberation and, as Swinton notes, “a recognition of shared vulnerability does away with the negative cultural assumption” (Swinton, 2011: 292). To this end, the subsequent topic

77

broadened our understanding of Eiesland symbolic image of God’s image as disabled, which has to do with the works of Christ.

5.2.1 God’s Image as Disabled

As previously established, and since Christology deals with human experience, the image of God as disabled, is a Christological image. Eiesland (1994: 100) remarks that, when Jesus presented Himself to His disciples, they were afraid, but then He called them to Him and asked them to touch His physical body, because a spirit does not have flesh and bones. Yong (2007: 12) explains that Eiesland’s proposal derives from the truth “embodied in the image of Jesus Christ, the disabled God”, and that the image is informed along three lines of Christological reflection. The first is incarnation, which means that Jesus had to be like His sisters and brothers in every respect (Yong, 2007: 12). The second is marks of impairment – in His hands, side and feet (Yong, 2007: 12), which we shall consider more closely. And the third is the Eucharist100, which is a Christian celebration that is meant for every believer, whether abled or disabled. For Cooper (1992: 179):

God is disabled in the sense that the reality of the disabled enters into God. God feels the world in the way the disabled person feels the world. To call God disabled reminds us of the concreteness of God's loving presence in the world.

Thus, God bearing the wounds of impairment, means He is in solidarity particularly with the marginalised such as the disabled (Fast, 2011: 429). We shall consider impairment as the image of God in the next part of the discussion.

5.2.2 God’s Image as Impairment

Impairment signifies the occurrence of symptoms that reduce the quality or strength of something which can be seen or heard. From Eiesland perspective, Jesus’ revelation of Himself to His disciples was a tangible existential reality, and the paradox is that Jesus appeared with an impairment, a broken body, which is reshaped and which represents injustice as well as sin in the fullness of the Godhead (Eiesland, 1994:99, 100). The resurrected Christ is seldom recognised as a deity whose hands, feet, and side bear the marks of profound physical impairment (Eiesland, 1999: 60). Jones (2014: 284) points to some forms of impairment from

100 _{“The Eucharist as body practice signifies solidarity and reconciliation: God among humankind, the temporarily}

able-bodied with people with dis- abilities, and we ourselves with our own bodies. In the Eucharist, we encounter the disabled God, who displayed the signs of disability, not as a demonstration of failure and defect, but in affirmation of connection and strength. In this resurrected Christ, the nonconventional body is recognised as sacrament. Christ’s solidarity with the more than 600 million people with disabilities worldwide is revealed in the Eucharist” (Eiesland, 2009: 243).

78

the Old Testament, for example, Moses had what is called speech impairment, which was probably why he overstayed when he went to meet God on the mountain; or perhaps it was God with the speech impairment. She reasons that when we find it hard to communicate with people who have a speech impairment, we do not recognise the image of God.