Special Issue Introduction: Disabling Theological Education

Dolmage in Academic Ableism (2017) exposed the ableist and eugenic character of academic culture explaining, “The ethic of higher education still encourages students and teachers alike to accentuate ability, valorize perfection, and stigmatize anything that hints at intellectual (or physical) weakness” (3). Dolmage used spatial metaphors to characterize higher education’s inaccessibility and exclusion: steep steps and retrofits. Steep steps (and heavy doors) are visible reminders that academic institutions have “limited public access and interaction in such a way as to avoid the chance encounter of diverse populations, creating a series of protected interior and isolated spaces” (41). Steep steps also represent a kind of “design apartheid”—the exclusion of disabled people from physical and educational design planning. Retrofits, on the other hand, are additions made to architecture and programs that present as inclusion but do so in an ableist way. In actuality, retrofits announce to people with disabilities, “you are welcome to join us, but there will be no permanent change to or rethinking of the buildings, programs, or pedagogy.” People with disabilities and their concerns are like the ramp; added to a rear entrance so as to not disturb the grand entrance, and just as easily removed. What is true of the university is also true of theological institutions. Both the university and the seminary have an ideal learner in mind, and this learner is a quick processer of information, self-sufficient, and, most importantly for readers of this journal, able-bodied. What is needed to address theological academic ableism is a disabling of theological education. By disabling I mean acknowledging and addressing ableist biases and the ways they work to filter out disabled bodies and minds from theological institutions. By disabling I mean, positively, including the gifts, challenges, and perspectives of persons with disabilities in all areas of seminary life