God, the Church, Autism, and Other People With Disabilities

     Yesterday, I read two articles that bothered me and I know that they also bothered many other people; I also commented on both of them. Both articles discuss autism and faith in God, or the lack of it, and spirituality. One article is titled, "Autism May Diminish Belief in God" and the other is titled, "Are Atheists More Autistic Than Believers?" The very titles suggest that people with autism are inherently less spiritual than others and have less capacity for God, than other people in the population. What is are the authors' explanations for their findings? The writers cite the well-known finding that "theory of mind," the ability to comprehend the feelings and thoughts of other people, is deficient in autism and at the root of so many autistic social difficulties. The writers tell us that the parts of the brain that are involved in appreciating and contemplating God as a Person with thoughts and feelings, are "theory of mind" traits. This "theory of mind" and the involved parts that enable us to see ourselves in relationship with God, are damaged by autism, reason the authors. The conclusion of all this? Autism means a reduced capacity for God and faith.
     The first article, "Autism Diminishes Belief in God," focuses on the supposed reduced capacity for God that autistic people have. Their conclusions are based on asking people with autism and those with traits of autism who are not diagnosed, questions about God, spirituality and faith. The writer bases his findings on what his subjects said in the surveys and the more autistic trait, the more the answers leaned toward diminished belief in God. The second article, "Are Atheists More Autistic Than Believers?" focuses on the supposed autistic traits of many atheists, asking whether many of them many have a form of high-functioning autism. These would include Asperger's Syndrome and Pervasive Development Syndrome--Not Otherwise Specified (PDD--NOS). Many who count themselves as atheists are no doubt offended at the suggestion that they may be considered to have traits of autism, but what is far more of a concern, even offense, to me, is the notion that atheism and autism are being compared in this fasion and the suggestion that autistic people are more likely to be atheists. What should be taken away from articles such as this?
     Let me answer this question with another question. If autism hinders faith in God and spirituality, who bears much of the responsibility for this? I suggest that much of this is because congregations and people of faith, have not known how or have not tried to learn how to welcome people with autism and many other disabilities, especially invisible ones) into their congregational life. What does feeling and being welcomed into the Church (the community of the people of God) have to do with faith in God? I suggest that it has to do everything with it! It is a serious matter when people feel chronically unwelcomed by the Church! It can harm them spiritually.When individuals, autistic or not, or families don't feel welcomed into the Church or a congregation, they rarely stay. And when individuals, autistic or not, or families feel shunned or not accepted by the people of God, they are going to find it easier to feel shunned or not accepted by God Himself. Let's face it, God is invisible and His people are all we can see. Being human, though we know that God is perfect and His people are imperfect, it is all too easy to confuse God with His people. And when autistic people (who are often  challenged in "theory of mind" and higher-order thinking skills) feel unwelcome in the Church, they will be even more likely to question and to doubt God. Why? It is so much easier to believe the message being sent out by the perceived (or actual) rejection of God's people, than it is to believe in the unseen God, His love and His assurance that His favor toward us is not based on what other people think or feel about us.
     Let me cite my own experience with this issue in my adulthood. When my our family became members in the Church and in a local congregation, I soon became uncomfortable there. The members themselves were nice, pleasant, respectable people, many being young professionals and these were typical "church people" with traditional, family values. But this came as rather of a "culture shock" to me, as I had spent much of my youth and early adults years with diverse people, and people with various learning, behavioral and physical disabilities. And I was used to them. But in congregations we visited or became members of, I saw much less diversity. Very few people had disabilities with the exception of more severe ones where the need was obvious and where they were much more likely to be welcomed. Yes, I'm sure that there were more than a few members (as in son many congregations) who had invisible disabilities and feared "coming out of the closet" with them because of possible stigma.
      I'm not blaming the members (or even the leadership) of any such congregation, as I'm sure so many may not have been exposed to the disability community and may often not know about any disabilities, especially the more complex, easily misunderstood and invisible ones. In this setting of people who were not much like so many I had known and grown up with, I became acutely aware of my differences and my background, which I knew were not "normal." I did my best to "stay in the closet" and when anyone asked me anything personal where I might have to share those "unsafe" subjects, I would clam up. And yet, judging from the reactions of others and even from what I heard from my spouse, people still sensed that "something was up" with me. I felt like a misfit and not accepted. And it wasn't that I didn't become involved so I could make a contribution. I did. Still, this did little to ease my feelings of not being welcomed. And, even today, though I know better, my natural tendency is to confuse God, Whom I cannot see, with His people, whom I could see. I tend to wrestle with doubts about my relationship with God; after all, if I have so often "struck out" with His people, what does this say about my relationship with Him? What does it say about my own faith and "spirituality" if I don't feel welcomed by His people?
     And I'm not speaking only for myself here. I know that many other people, autistic or not, disabled or not, have not felt welcome in congregations. I'm positive that this happens with people with disabilities much more often and who have often not felt welcomed in the Church. In the case of those with physical disabilities, welcoming them requires that the Church make their premises accessible: ramps for those unable to walk without difficulty, sign language interpreters for deaf people who use sign language, the allowance of service dogs for those who use them for various disabilities, and I can add more and I'm sure some of you can. And congregations can create a supportive environment where people with invisible disabilities will feel less afraid to "come out of the closet" with their unseen differences and will find that they will not be judged but will be accepted. But I know that many congregations, especially large ones, feel that it is a churchgoer's or member's responsibility to reach out, get involved and make a contribution and that, as a by-product, they will be included and accepted. There is truth to this, that all of us, disabled or autistic or without disabilities, should reach out and seek to contribute to out congregations. However, in the case of people with disabilities, obvious or invisible, more support and often accommodations are needed for most to feel and be welcomed into the Church.
     I know that providing physical accommodations needed by so many with visible disabilities, often costs money or may be seen as inconveniencing others, such as allowing service dogs or other service animals. And in the case of invisible disabilities, especially the complex, more easily misunderstood ones, congregations will need to take time and effort to educate themselves about these. Yes, I recognize that, unfair as it may be, those of us in the disability community and with these conditions, will probably have to lead the way in this, advocating for ourselves and for so many others.
     Getting back to the topic of autism and faith in God, I can't help but but believe that much of this perceived "reduced capacity for God" and even comparisons with atheists, says something also about how autistic people have often not felt welcomed in the Church. I recognize that the Church often does not feel equipped to deal with a complex neurological condition like autism and so often don't know how to welcome autistic people. And since autism means a different way of thinking and different wiring, the Church needs to find out how to make God real to autistic people according to their different wiring. There are no easy answers to this, obviously. But I think that when the Church will try to reach out to autistic people, we may see more come to our local churches and want to know our God. The writers of these two articles seem to be boxing God in, suggesting that He is not able to reveal Himself and make Himself real to those with different wiring or thinking. These articles insult God as much as they do autistic people. Is God limited by the way someone is wired? Didn't He make the brain in the first place? Who is the Creator of those with disabilities, including autism? And doesn't His call to "go into all the world" with His message include those with autism and other disabilities?
     Is the Church listening?

Certain Groups of People Have Less Empathy Than Others?

     Before launching this blog about empathy and stereotypes of certain groups, I don't think there is any argument that one category of people, as shown by their attitudes, behavior and lifestyles, are clearly lacking in empathy, which is commonly known as the ability to put oneself in another's position, to feel something of what that person is experiencing, and to act accordingly. I'm talking about people whose acts and attitudes indicate signs that they are sociopaths or psychopaths, whether these people have been officially diagnosed as either, or not, or who have similar DSM psychiatric conditions (antisocial personality disorder, etc.), whether diagnosed or not. These are the criminals whose acts ruin people's happiness, well-being, reputations, their safety, or their lives, and who enjoy hurting people.
     Over a week ago, I was online and was exploring a Facebook page that was set up to link to the website on which it is based and which deals with cultivating a culture of empathy and to the study of empathy in indivuals and groups of people. I was most struck by a study that was called, "Highly religious people are less likely to be motivated by empathy than non-religious people," "Very religious people are less likely to help a person in need," and "Studies indicate that highly religious people are less compassionate than others." What did the study mean by "very religious" or "highly religious," anyway? And how do social scientists come to these conclusions?
     As a person who has, indeed, seen, encountered, and heard about many attitudes and behaviors exhibited by people of faith which I would not call compassionate or empathic, I can understand how social scientists have come up with such study results. For I think that the principles and beliefs of people of faith and the ever-human tendency to misunderstand God's love and God's grace, makes it easy to be motivated by the Law of God in the attempt to carry out one's responsibilities to God and one's neighbor. Being motivated by the Ten Commandments (which are meant to be a guide to the behavior of the person of faith) instead of by the grace of God and drawing on His power to live, makes trying to keep the Law oppressive and chokes the ability to care for others or to feel with them. This is called legalism. So I think, in this way, these study results do make sense. None of us who call ourselves people of faith, me included, are immune to falling into this trap. Legalism is always a temptation as grace is countercultural, unnatural, and challenging to wrap our minds around. Jesus denounced and lambasted legalism more than anything else, especially in the religious leaders of this day, because of their positions of power and influence.
     But what does "very religious" mean and does this refer to devotion to any religion? I see no answers from these study articles. Yet history, media and personal experience should tells us that countless people of faith, "highly religious" people, have and continue to, live lives and show attitudes marked by empathy and compassion. It is people of faith who have led the way in abolishing slavery, who have rescued many abandoned babies and children, who often lead the way in fighting world poverty on many different fronts, visiting prisoners, and reaching out to needy people in countless ways. It's people of faith who are motivated to dedicate some or most of their lives as selfless missionaries, often going to places no one else will go to and serving people no one else wants to deal with. Do these social scientists know their history? And as has been true of the history of people of faith and caring social action, remains true today.
     There's another group of people who are widely considered to be short on empathy. These are people who have autism spectrum disoders (ASDs), whether this means the more severe, classic autism or the higher-functioning subtypes of Asperger's Syndrome or Pervasive Development Disorder-Not Otherwise Specified (PDD-NOS). In fact, the "empathy" deficit is part of the diagnostic criteria in evaluating people for autism. This is because having an autism mind hinders people from easily seeing things from the viewpoint of another person; this is called the "theory of mind." But this "theory of mind" is is actually a matter of thinking and cognition. Is this "impaired social understanding" incompatible with the ability to put oneself in another's place, to feel with them and to act on this, which is the common defintion of empathy? Young children and, certainly, animals, do not have the mental capacity to mentally comprehend the viewpoints of others or have a "theory of mind." But who will question the capacity that many small children and many animals have, to have and show compassion? For example, today on TV, a moving video was aired; it was of a small child comforting her upset father, an athlete, whose team had lost the game. Studies have shown that many babies do what is called an "empathy cry," crying when they hear another baby cry. There is a blogspot, called Autism and Empathy, which is dedicated to using stories written by people in the autism community, to undo the myth that autism precludes empathy in people or that autistic people are incapable of having or showing empathy. You can visit this blogspot and read the stories there:
http://autismandempathy.blogspot.com.
     And I have noticed another thing. These two groups of people, people of faith and people with ASDs, often seen as not having empathy, often themselves do not receive or are treated with empathy! I can understand how many people, hurt by the hateful words or actions of some legalists (especially with authority), who scream about their moral beliefs, not bothering to show love or grace to people in the process. But society often has no tolerance for anyone, no matter how gracious or empathic in attitude or lifestyle, who stands up for their moral principles and take unpopular stands. Jesus Himself always told people the truth but He always did so with love and grace. And yet, He ended up being nailed to a wooden cross, at the hands of religious leaders and Roman authorities. For the truth often hurts, no matter how graciously it is delivered. And so it's easy to punish the messenger of bad news. For example, take the hot-button issues of abortion and same-sex marriage. There are  Biblical teachings, which are also found in the New Testament, about God's recognition of life from conception and Old AND New Testament teachings (from the mouth of Jesus Himself), marriage was ordained by God to be between a man and a woman. Therefore, many people of faith strongly believe that abortion and same-sex marriage are very wrong. It's not because they don't care about women in need or hate homosexuals (those who do are among the extremists); they would be the first to denounce crimes against abortion providers or homosexuals. But many people don't realize this and have no empathy for anyone with strong convictions based on religious beliefs. Period. And in the same way, society often sees the behavior of people with ASDs that often are a response to different wiring, not character and conclude that because many may not be able to show empathy at the right time and in the right place, that people with ASDS lack empathy. But just because people with ASDs may not always show empathy does not mean not having empathy and showing it, even in unconventional ways.
     I'm not going to go into the mention of other people groups who considered as having an empathy deficit. The point is that no group of people should be stereotyped.