Theologies of Vulnerability and Dependency

Instructor: David N. Scott, MTS, Ph.D.

Introduction to the Course

Course Details

Course Description

Using the category of "disability" as a starting point, this seminar examines constructive theologies in which attention to human vulnerability, limitation, and interdependence is fundamental to religious thought and practice. It presents "ableism" as a form of social injustice, emphasizing its intersections with other forms of oppression. It names Christianity's past and present complicity in ableism, while also highlighting the tradition's resources for effective opposition. Consideration expands beyond persons with disabilities to include common phases of life like infancy and frail old age. The course's primary aim is to equip students to articulate theologies that affirm that which ableism devalues.

 

Course Objectives

1. Introduce students to many of the authors, texts, and conversations that currently define the field of disability theologies.
2. Identify and encourage fluency in the vocabulary and concepts distinctive to disability studies.
3. Explore how the relevance of the themes of vulnerability, limitation, and interdependence extends well beyond the boundaries of theologies of disability to any discussion of human being, human flourishing, or embodiment.
4. Name the ways in which ableism is embedded in the conceptual frameworks, cultural practices, and physical structures of Western society.
5. Equip students to articulate theological viewpoints that affirm both the full humanity and dignity of even the most vulnerable and dependent persons and the necessity of Christian communities to attend to the care and well-being of those persons.
6. Facilitate the continued development of skills in reading, writing, and critical thinking.

Course Requirements (At a Glance)

Attendance/Participation                     25%
Critical Analysis Presentation              15%
Science & the Body Book Statement  10%
Final Paper                                             50%

Course Requirements (Detailed Descriptions)

Class Participation and Attendance (25% of grade): The discipline of theology is not merely a study of the history of certain ideas.  More importantly, it is an ongoing conversation among persons who are commonly committed to addressing theological problems and questions about what it means to live faithfully in the context of day-to-day life.  For that reason, active engagement in online discussions and full attendance during Gathering Days are two essential components of this course. Both the quality and depth of theological conversation depend heavily on the voices involved.  Students should enter into online discussions and come to in-class sessions having read all the assigned readings for that day and having thoughtfully considered the key ideas and arguments presented in those readings. For more on what makes a proper contribution to class discussion, see "Policies on Academic and Collegial Integrity."

            The evaluation of a student’s weekly contributions to online discussion forums includes a quantitative requirement. In a typical week, a student ought to contribute at least 3 posts to the current forum, the first reacting to a classmate’s Critical Analysis Presentation and discussion questions (see the section below for details) and the others simply being organic and engaged comments or questions. Students are encouraged to post more than this if they would like. The quantitative requirement is just a minimal threshold meant to keep all students active in the course on a weekly basis. Each first post is worth 5 points, and both subsequent posts are worth 2.5 points. In most instances, a post that is on topic and on time will receive full points. The “Course Rhythm” section of the syllabus provides further instructions concerning the basic mechanics of online conversations.

Critical Analysis Presentation (15% of grade): Beginning in Week 2, each student will take a turn helping the instructor lead class discussion. In a typical week, the students who have signed up for that week will make a parent post in the discussion forum consisting of 750-1000 words. This contribution will critically engage a portion of a required text in a way that helps shape the substance and direction of class discussion. In this parent post, the student must:

• Identify the distinct contribution to constructive theology or theory. If the reading is an author’s own constructive proposal, name the central thesis of that proposal. If the reading is a survey, state the key insights that bind a group of scholars together, as well the general conclusions the author of the survey may draw. This task often involves distinguishing passages of argument from passages of exposition.
• Summarize the case made in support of this contribution. If a constructive proposal, what are the most noteworthy points the author makes in support of the thesis statement? If a survey chapter, what are the most compelling reasons to adopt the general approach described there. In most cases, it will also be necessary to identify where this reading fits within the larger context of the book in which it appears. 
• Provide a critical appraisal of the reading. When formulating this appraisal, the student should consider questions such as: As a work of constructive theology, what present-day issues or resources does the author emphasize? How does this proposal resemble or deviate from traditional articulations of the doctrine(s) under discussion? How internally coherent, clear, or convincing is this proposal in its own right?
• Raise a question or two for further discussion. For example, the student might raise the question of how the adoption of a particular theological anthropology promises to promote or harm the life of faith communities. Alternatively, the student might respectfully compare this reading to other proposals or perspectives examined in the course. Above all else, a discussion question needs to bring together the student’s strongest interests in the material with what one expects their classmates will be eager to unpack.
• Revisit and guide the conversation. A student’s responsibility for illuminating and unpacking the assigned reading does not end with attaching the Word document to a parent post. One should be prepared to provide additional exposition or analysis of that text if the comments and questions of other students require it. The student will also be expected to follow that week’s other threads of conversation.

As part of the process of organizing these contributions, students should select a reading from the options listed Canvas at their earliest convenience. (The following links will take you to the sign-up sheet for either Discussion Group 1 or Discussion Group 2.) Further instructions about when these papers must be submitted and how other students ought to engage them may be found in the “Course Rhythm” section of the syllabus.

NOTE: There will be no Critical Analysis Presentations in Weeks 1, 5, or 6.

 

Science & the Body Book Statement (10% of grade): In addition to the six common texts required for this course, students must choose a seventh text (Doudna & Sternberg, Kean, or Lents) which they will engage largely on their own. This is intended to be a more fun, low-stakes assignment. Students should use the sign-up sheet on Canvas at their earliest convenience. 

Proper engagement of the selected text will involve the completion of two tasks:

1. Group Presentation during Gathering Days (5%). As many as seven students will review each book. During Gathering Days, all of the students working with the same book will meet in a small group for roughly one hour to discuss their respective interpretations and critical reactions. For this reason, students should have engaged the entirety of their selected text before the on-campus sessions in Week 5. Each small group will also make a brief presentation to the rest of the class explaining the basic thesis or purpose of the book, the author’s chosen method or approach, and the group’s collective reasons for being excited and/or apprehensive about the content of the book. The group will also field questions. As long as these responsibilities are performed, each member will receive full credit for the presentation.
   
   
2. Written Report (5%). In the middle of Week 6, each student must submit a written document of 650-750 words consisting of the following:
   • Content and Purpose of the Book - Compose a brief but representative characterization of the book's subject matter, including a summary of any overarching claims or argument the author makes about that material.
   • Relevance to the Course - Describe specific ways in which this book will likely appeal to people already interested in the topics of disability, human vulnerability, and dependence.
   • Critical Reaction - Offer a focused reflection on how this book impacted you, your chief takeaways, and how you think you might put its insights to effective use in the future.

The written report must be submitted by 11:59pm MT (1:59 am ET) on Wednesday, May 1st.

 

Final Paper (50% of grade): As in many topical seminars, the last and most heavily-weighted assignment will be a research paper. This paper may take the form of a constructive proposal on a specific doctrine in light of the major themes of the course, a close reading and critique of an assigned text, or any other topic for which the student receives instructor approval. This project will be completed in two stages:

1. Prospectus (10%). In Week 8, each student must submit a preliminary statement detailing tentative plans for the final paper. This document must name the student's chosen topic, provisional thesis statement, motivations and goals for engaging this material, and a brief list of key books, articles, and other resources that may be used. 
   
   This statement must be submitted by 11:59 pm MT (1:59 am ET) on Monday, May 13th.
   
   
2. Final Draft (40%). The final draft of the paper will need to consist of 2500-3000 words. Students may select their own citation style as long as they employ it consistently and accurately (Chicago style is recommended). Papers must feature a clear, strong thesis statement, demonstrate an appropriate level of research beyond the assigned course material, and exhibit a level of thoughtfulness and critical thinking befitting a depth seminar.
   
   Graduating students must submit their final draft by 11:59 pm MT (1:59 am ET) on Tuesday, May 28th.
   
   Non-graduating students must submit their final draft by 11:59 pm MT (1:59 am ET) on Monday, June 3rd.

 

Grading Scale 

A	93-100%
A-	90-92%
B+	87-89%
B	83-86%
B-	80-82%
C+	77-79%
C	73-76%
C-	70-72%

 

 

In my experience, providing students a clear rhythm for a typical class week helps them plan their time in the course more easily. Keep yourself to a regular rhythm as suits your schedule to avoid getting lost. Let me know if you have questions.

Monday Afternoon/Evening: The module for the current week becomes fully available no later than 6 pm MT (8 pm ET). The first item is each module is an introductory video by the instructor. The primary function of these videos will be to frame class discussion and provide additional remarks on upcoming assignments. Their content will likely also include a summary of salient points from the preceding week's discussion. Students can expects videos to run for 10-30 minutes, depending on the course material covered.
 
Discussion forums also open at this time. Starting in Week 2, Critical Analysis Presentations are due by 11:59 pm MT (1:59 am ET). (See assignment description and group sign-up sheets.) While all students will have access to the discussion forum at this time, only students providing a Critical Analysis Presentations should post before Tuesday. Conversation will benefit from waiting until all that week’s Critical Analysis Presentations have been posted (assuming, of course, that all presentations are posted on time). 

Tuesday Morning: The week's discussion forum is officially open to all students. There will be only one discussion forum in a typical week (Weeks 1 and 5 being the exceptions). Students should watch the instructor’s video introduction to the module and read all Critical Analysis Presentations before making their first posts.

Thursday Evening: Each student’s first discussion post is due by 11:59 pm MT (1:59 am ET). This should be a 150-to-250-word response to one of that week’s Critical Analysis Presentations. Strong posts will directly address the content of a Critical Analysis Presentation, responding to its exposition of an assigned reading and/or attempting to answer the question(s) it poses. Students should not feel the pressure to make these posts mini-essays in their own right; they should simply be relevant and meaningful statements in an academic conversation. Also, posts may exceed the upper limit stated here. However, keep in mind that the longer a post runs, the more likely it is to put off classmates.

Friday: Having given students ample opportunity to engage one another first, the instructor will read all posts made up to that point and contribute as necessary.

Sunday Evening: All other discussion posts are due by 11:59 pm MT (1:59 am ET), when that week’s forum closes. Each student must provide at least two additional responses per forum (three total) - no length limits. This is a bare minimum requirement; even more posts across any or all of the forum’s threads are encouraged. The only posts that will be marked down are those that are late (see Late Policy) or stray too far afield in their content (also see Policies on Academic and Collegial Integrity).

Monday Morning/Afternoon: After reading over the weekend’s posts, the instructor will provide one last round of responses and assess participation scores. Whenever possible, the instructor will begin providing these responses during the weekend itself. Students are welcome to continue posting in the forum after the Sunday deadline, but they should keep in mind that such a post may go unread by most (if not all) other participants. The course rhythm starts over when the following week's module unlocks on Monday afternoon/evening.  

Week 5 Exception (Gathering Days)
There will be no online discussion forums during the week of April 21^st. There will still be assigned readings, but the work we do with that material will take place in on-campus sessions on April 26^th and 27^th. Our assigned room is Bartlett Lounge.

In addition to the information provided under "Policies & Services" (see Canvas menu to the left), students should be aware of the following policies, which are specific to my courses.

Policy on Late Assignments
Written Documents: An assignment submitted after its stated deadline will incur a penalty of 5% the assignment’s total value for each 24-hour period it is late. If the instructor does not receive the assignment within 72 hours of its deadline, it will receive no points.

Forum Posts: A Critical Analysis Presentation posted after the Monday deadline will incur a penalty of 10% the assignment’s total value. If a Critical Analysis Presentation still has not been posted within 24 hours of its deadline, it will receive no points.
If a student does not make the first discussion post by the Thursday night deadline, one point will be deducted from the student’s weekly discussion grade for each day the post is late.
If a student does not make the required second and/or third posts before the Sunday night deadline, one point will be deducted from the student's weekly discussion grade for each of those posts that is late.
Posts made more than 24 hours after the Sunday night deadline will not receive credit.

 

Policies on Academic and Collegial Integrity

All students are expected to abide by Iliff’s statement on Academic Integrity, as published in the Masters Student Handbook. Any detected plagiarism or cheating on an assignment will result in an automatic penalty of an "F" for that assignment. All participants in this class are expected to be familiar with Iliff’s Core Values.

Proper online and in-class participation consists of contributions that facilitate the stated objectives for this course.  The purpose of our learning community is to equip each student to articulate a theological perspective and to demonstrate understanding and generosity toward each of our peers, not in the absence of disagreement and passion, but in the midst of them.  Accomplishing this purpose demands that all students do their best to discipline themselves concerning the content, frequency, and spirit of what they say:

 

• The content of a quality contribution will depend on the material under discussion, be it an assigned reading, an instructor lecture, or a student presentation. Comments ought to remain relevant to this material and connect with the input and contributions of others.  Personal stories and opinions, cultural references, humor -these things all have a place in constructive theological discussion, but only if they clarify or amplify the ideas at the center of an exchange.  This is why preparation is key: If everyone is on the same page (sometimes literally), then being understood and understanding others gets that much easier.  Also, when disagreeing with a theological proposal, remember that criticism is not the same as critique.  True critique aims to illuminate the most perceptive or impactful points in another's position rather than remaining content to point out just any detail one might find objectionable.
• Achieving the proper frequency of participation is a challenge in all forms of communication, but especially during academic engagement. Many students will need to push themselves to contribute regularly in the face of uncertainty, anxiety, and (yes, sometimes) boredom.  Others will have to curb their contribution occasionally because they are naturally verbose or prone to argue.  To these students, I can offer no better advice than these words of Dr. Edward Antonio: "Be warned of the dangers of being besotted with the sound of your own voice and the appearance of your own ideas. This can lead to monopolizing the floor, over-participation, irrelevance and the exclusion and silencing of other voices."  As the instructor, I will be sure to offer a tactful word of advice to students who habitually fall into one of these patterns of participation.
• By the spirit of one's remarks, I have in mind all those things that go into showing respect for a conversation partner. For me, it is a notion that brings together tone, intent, and specific types of content.  Students should keep their comments free of hatred, slander, or discriminatory remarks.  Each of us should be deliberate about which passions and convictions we give expression to in a class setting, rather than be impulsive or overly reactive.  Students should almost always anticipate disagreement on sensitive topics and choose words that are charitable towards those with opposing viewpoints.  Finally, all participants should use inclusive language in writing and in speech. This is not merely an instructor’s preference but an expectation of the institution itself.

NOTE: Thanks to the generosity of Taylor Library, the majority of this course's required texts may be accessed for free through Primo. Use the links for these texts below and in the "Reading Assignments" section of the syllabus.

Required Texts

Deborah Beth Creamer. Disability and Christian Theology: Embodied Limits and
Constructive Possibilities. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2009.

Monica A. Coleman. Bipolar Faith: A Black Woman's Journey with Depression and Faith. Minneapolis, MN: Fortress Press, 2016.

Elizabeth O'Donnell Gandolfo. The Power and Vulnerability of Love: A Theological Anthropology. Minneapolis, MN: Fortress Press, 2015.

Molly C. Haslam. A Constructive Theology of Intellectual Disability: Human Being as Mutuality and Response. New York: Fordham University Press, 2012.

John Swinton. Dementia: Living in the Memories of God. Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B Eerdmans Publishing Co., 2012.

Amos Yong. The Bible, Disability, and the Church: A New Vision of the People of God. Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co, 2011.

One of the following three books (see sign-up sheet on Canvas):

Douna, Jennifer A., and Samuel H. Sternberg. A Crack in Creation: Gene Editing and the Unthinkable Power to Control Evolution, reprint ed. New York: Mariner Books, 2018.

Kean, Sam. The Tale of the Dueling Neurosurgeons: The History of the Human Brain as Revealed by True Stories of Trauma, Madness, and Recovery. New York: Little, Brown and Company, 2015.

Lents, Nathan H. Human Errors: A Panorama of Our Glitches from Pointless Bones to Broken Genes. New York: Houghton Mifflin Harcourt, 2018.

 

Recommended Additional Resources

These texts are part of the Ira J. Taylor Library reference collection

Patrick W. Carey and Joseph T. Leinhard, eds. Biographical Dictionary of Christian Theologians. Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 2000.

Justo L. González. Essential Theological Terms. Louisville, KY: Westminster John Knox Press, 2005.

Donald K. McKim. Westminster Dictionary of Theological Terms, 2^nd Edition. Louisville, KY: Westminster John Knox Press, 2014.

Ian A. McFarland, et al., eds. The Cambridge Dictionary of Christian Theology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2014.

Donald W. Musser and Joseph L. Price, eds. New and Enlarged Handbook of Christian Theology. Nashville, TN: Abingdon Press, 2003.

 

These texts belong to the the combined Iliff/DU library collection

Rebecca S. Chopp and Mark Lewis Taylor, eds. Reconstructing Christian Theology. Minneapolis, MN: Fortress Press, 1994.

Nancy L. Eiesland. The Disabled God: Toward a Liberatory Theology of Disability. Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1994.

David H. Jensen. Graced Vulnerability: A Theology of Childhood. Cleveland, OH: The Pilgrim's Press, 2005.

Sarah J. Melcher, Mikeal C. Parsons, and Amos Yong, eds. The Bible and Disability: A Commentary. Waco, TX: Baylor University Press, 2017.

Candida R. Moss and Jeremy Schipper, eds. Disability Studies and Biblical Literature. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2011.

Hans S. Reinders. Receiving the Gift of Friendship: Profound Disability, Theological Anthropology and Ethics. Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 2008.

Thomas E. Reynolds. Vulnerable Communion: A Theology of Disability and Hospitality. Grand Rapids, MI: Brazos Press, 2008.

Week 1 – Introduction: A Meditation on Vulnerability 

• Elizabeth O'Donnell Gandolfo, The Power and Vulnerability of Love, Introduction & Part I. (173 pages)

Week 2 – Interdisciplinary Considerations of Disability and Dependence 

• Colin Barnes, “A Brief History of Discrimination and Disabled People.” (PDF)
• Martha L. A. Fineman, “Masking Dependency: The Political Role of Family Rhetoric.” (PDF)
• Eva Feder Kittay, “Ethics of Care, Dependence, and Disability.” (PDF)
• Robert McRuer, “Compulsory Able-Bodiedness and Queer/Disabled Existence.” (PDF)
• Thomas E. Reynolds, "Invoking Deep Access." (PDF)
  (71 total pages) 

Week 3 – The Limits Model of Disability

• Deborah Beth Creamer, Disability and Christian Theology. (120 pages)

Week 4 – The Bible and Disability 

• Amos Yong, The Bible, Disability, and the Church, Introduction & Chs. 1-4. (115 pages)

 

Week 5 - Gathering Days

Room: Bartlett Lounge
April 26^th - Vulnerability and Mental Health

• Monica A. Coleman, Bipolar Faith. (343 pages)
• Jay Ruckelshaus, "The Non-Politics of Disability"
  https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/18/opinion/denouncing-trump-wont-help-disability-rights.html

April 27^th - GROUP PRESENTATIONS on Science & the Body Books

 

Week 6 – Infancy and Childhood
BOOK STATEMENT WRITTEN REPORT DUE 

Required Essays

• Brian Brock, “Supererogation and the Riskiness of Human Vulnerability.” (PDF)
• Marsha Saxton, “Disability Rights and Selective Abortion.” (PDF)

Recommended Reading

• Richard P. Heitzenrater, “John Wesley and Children.” (PDF)
• Dina Zirlott, "I Wish I'd Had a 'Late-Term Abortion' Instead of Having My Daughter."
  NOTE: In addition to the topics of abortion and special-needs children, this autobiographical narrative includes descriptions of sexual assault and infant death. It is the sort of grounded perspective Saxton's article encourages us to consider, but it is also more emotionally demanding than the typical reading in this course. 
  (https://www.huffpost.com/entry/late-term-abortion-rape_n_5c630b8de4b0a8731aeabbd6?ncid=engmodushpmg00000003&fbclid=IwAR1wmHzvymDVZNvKKbS9--0hEUTkSCoVCfoUhFEOocrVqJ81DAFY04KnEz4)

(47 total pages + online article)

 

Week 7 – Vulnerability and the Image of God  

•  Gandolfo, The Power and Vulnerability of Love, Parts II & III. (143 pages)
  
  

Week 8 – Intellectual Disability
PROSPECTUS FOR FINAL PAPER DUE 

• Molly C. Haslam, A Constructive Theology of Intellectual Disability. (116 pages)
  
  

 Week 9 – Dementia and Old Age

• John Swinton, Dementia, Introduction & Chs. 1-2 and Chs. 5-8. (165 pages)
  
  

Week 10 – Hope for Future Communities

• Yong, The Bible, Disability, and The Church, Ch. 5 & Epilogue
• Swinton, Dementia, Chs. 9-10.
  (91 total pages)

Graduating students must submit their final paper by 11:59 pm MT (1:59 am ET) on Tuesday, May 28th.

Finals Week
Non-graduating students must submit their final paper by 11:59 pm MT (1:59 am ET) on Monday, June 3rd.

Sign-Up Sheets

Instructions: Once you have chosen a book to write your statement on, enter your name in the appropriate field below (assuming, of course, an open field is still available).  No more than seven students may sign up for the same text, so be sure to "call dibs" on your preferred option at your earliest convenience.  

Since I have set this page up in a Wiki format, students may edit their entries as needed.  That having been said, please edit this page only as much as is necessary and, although it should go without saying, do not alter another person's entry. All students should sign up for their respective books by Friday, March 29th. The instructor will assign a book to any student who hasn't signed up before that deadline passes.

Note: As of March 26th, all available slots have been filled, so I have turned off the "Edit" option for this page.

Instructions: Once you have chosen a reading for your Critical Analysis Presentation, enter your name in the appropriate field (assuming that field is still open).  For each week of the course, I have singled out individual chapters from the required texts that I want to make sure we examine closely during class discussion. Dividing up the readings in this way should also alleviate student concern that a presentation needs to address the entirety of that week's material.  NOTE: There are no Critical Analysis Presentations in Weeks 1, 5, and 6.  

Since I have set this page up in a Wiki format, students may edit their entries as needed.  That having been said, please edit this page only as much as is necessary and, although it should go without saying, do not alter other persons' entries. All students should sign up for their respective readings by Friday, March 29th. The instructor will assign a reading to any student who hasn't signed up before that deadline passes.

Note: As of March 29th, all students in this group have claimed a presentation slot, so I have turned off the "Edit" option for this page.

Instructions: Once you have chosen a reading for your Critical Analysis Presentation, enter your name in the appropriate field (assuming that field is still open).  For each week of the course, I have singled out individual chapters from the required texts that I want to make sure we examine closely during class discussion. Dividing up the readings in this way should also alleviate student concern that a presentation needs to address the entirety of that week's material.  NOTE: There are no Critical Analysis Presentations in Weeks 1, 5, and 6.  

Since I have set this page up in a Wiki format, students may edit their entries as needed.  That having been said, please edit this page only as much as is necessary and, although it should go without saying, do not alter other persons' entries. All students should sign up for their respective readings by Friday, March 29th. The instructor will assign a reading to any student who hasn't signed up before that deadline passes.

Note: As of March 26th, all students in this group have claimed a presentation slot, so I have turned off the "Edit" option for this page.

Instructions: Once you have chosen a book to write your statement on, enter your name in the appropriate field below (assuming, of course, an open field is still available).  No more than seven students may sign up for the same text, so be sure to "call dibs" on your preferred option at your earliest convenience.  

Since I have set this page up in a Wiki format, students may edit their entries as needed.  That having been said, please edit this page only as much as is necessary and, although it should go without saying, do not alter another person's entry. All students should sign up for their respective books by Friday, March 29th. The instructor will assign a book to any student who hasn't signed up before that deadline passes.

Note: As of March 26th, all available slots have been filled, so I have turned off the "Edit" option for this page.