‘Et homo factus est:’ Incarnation, disability and interdependence

ABSTRACT Nancy Eiesland’s, The Disabled God seminally argued that Incarnation and disability are not mutually exclusive. Disability was integral to Christ’s humanity. Others developed the claim that imago Dei lies in relational capacity (shared by all). This paper takes this further, proposing that disability theology enables re-examination of the broader doctrine of Incarnation. This sees ‘The Disabled God’ present at the outset of Christ’s earthly life as a function of taking on humanity, not merely in the wounds of Crucifixion. Aspects of Christian tradition which have been neglected include the understanding that Christ’s assumed humanity is essentially limited and interdependent on others and God – and the implications for disability. I suggest it is precisely the flawed conception of incarnation that sees humans as self-contained that has led to disability being associated with theodicy, with exclusionary consequences. The conclusion examines benefits to faith and Church of rediscovering a healthy Incarnational theology.