Churches Must Be Open to Be Accessible

This post is in response to a post on Alban Institute Roundtable about churches welcoming disabled or others representing a challenging status in society.

The Alban post begins by referencing a 2004 commercial created by the United Church of Christ that used stunning imagery of churches barring or ejecting the disabled, elderly, homosexual couples or people who visibly represent a racial or ethnic minority.

What follows is a very good review of the challenges facing congregations living up to Jesus’ mandate of inclusion.

The article states that the imagery was meant to be provocative.

It may be more than that. It may be true.

The fact is denominational leaders are entering sanctuaries and evicting the faithful, sometimes using stealth and chicanery. They are locking doors and barring access to members who rely on their neighborhood churches to support their faith, to know their problems without having to ask for help or special consideration, to strengthen their families, and let’s not forget, to worship.

The discussion of the church and inclusion should be broadened to include the endangered neighborhood church. If churches are closed and sold for their assets, it doesn’t matter if they have handicapped ramps, listening aids or large-type bulletins. They are not there to help anyone.

Denominations are taking from the people they label as frail to strengthen their own needs which are growing as mainline denominations decline and the economy fails. The attitude: It is too much trouble to serve them. We might as well take what they have and relieve our own problems.

Denominations are relying on “separation of church and state” to leave their authority unquestioned, even when their governing statutes forbid their actions. Intimidating tactics ensure that their own rank and file will not intervene. They assume absolute power — and we all know the saying that goes with that!

Bystanders, which include staff, clergy and congregations, assume that the victims are somehow being put out of their misery . . . that it’s all for the good of the Kingdom. They justify inaction and settle their consciences with . . . . “Well, the denomination knows better how to use resources than the smaller churches.” A study of church history does not bear this out, and that’s why the Lutheran Church and some other denominations foster congregational polity.

The people they are hurting include the very people the Christian mission seeks to help. The disabled and the disenfranchised play important roles in small churches in a very natural way. They are not “allowed” to serve as acolytes and ushers or readers. They just do these things as does everyone else. They don’t have to ask for help; their neighbors and families know their needs and their strengths. They — or should we say “we”– go to church where we have found this acceptance.

It is often the small churches with 100 members and valuable properties that denominations eye as easy pickings. In doing so, they threaten their entire denominational mission.

When you lock the doors of a neighborhood church, you are locking out the crippled, who can’t get to the large suburban churches that have elevators and ramps but no public transportation. You are locking out ethnic groups trying to make lives in the neighborhood where they have chosen to live. You are locking out disadvantaged children who walk to church by themselves when their single moms or dads work on Sunday morning. You are evicting the elderly who gave their best years to the neighborhood church and now need their support. You are putting the disadvantaged in a position where they have to beg to be included or noticed.

The imagery of that commercial is real. This is happening.

Accessibility begins with proximity.

‘Truly I say to you, to the extent that you did not do it to one of the least of these, you did not do it to Me.’