Books Five and Six David Pytches ‘Some said it thundered’ and Synder and Mitchell ‘Cultural Locations of Disability’
First David Pytches ‘Some said it thundered’
Coming from a man of God with an established Ministry built on godly integrity, David Pytches like others in the Vineyard and Anglican Communion such as Stibbe have let us down.
Revelation captures their souls rather than the deeper stories lying beneath. In wishing not to dismiss the Kansas City Prophets who were later exposed as scandal ridden, Pytches has fallen into classic errors of niavete thus giving ground where no ground was warranted. Hence the proliferation of bloggers blogging the various well known documented errors of the above Community.
Pytches uses the !!! with alarming frequency, this is a new toy, (there is history of genuine prophetic coming from those such as the Desert Fathers and one’s such as Hildegard of Bilgen) he does not discern the nature of the prophetic he is encountering. He does not percieve the hatred of the Pastoral and Healing Ministries that would so expose their actions; he does not recognise the US-centric imperialistic emphasis or discern global and movement speech. He does not see the attachement to prophetic TO THE EXCLUSION of other aspects of the Fivefold: pastoral, healing, . His thinking is clouded by the phenomena he is encountering, deluded by a mess of words spouted at him willy nilly.
For all those damaged by the above this book represents a disapointment to all of us who hoped our undershepherds would truly heed the love and care of the Good Shepherd.
Synder and Mitchell The Cultural Locations of Disability 2006
I brought this to provide some particularities data to the thinking I am having around exploring the peculiar circumstances regarding the word ’emancipation’ and the problem it poses to us who are effectively institutionalized by a variety of practices designed ostensibly for our good good..
And particularities it does. Synder and Mitchell are one of the few Academics providing for us a radical account of the actualites of disabled peoples lives as a source of a ‘never ending research machine’. The research machine also provides rehabilitation and taxomonies based on medical need. But instead of heed it’s emancipatory arms ie critical theory and ethical philosophy, it imposes a whole infrastruture of control where the disabled lose rights by very right of their being disabled.
(Phamaceutical companies in this instance institute open season on such disabilies by chemical Coshes, and medicalisation of deviant behaviours separate from actual medical need). It is US based but despite of the analysis being based on US eugencics practices it is useful for all disabilies studies-especially those of service users who are the benefactors of the researcher machine whose knowledge is not needed as phenomenological experts.
Synder and Mitchell couragously in my humble opinion describe the assumption that disabled people don’t have rights by right of them being institutionalized and the practices therein. The Service users are powerless to resist the movements of the Superior Body on account of their inarticulacy* (charles taylor as yet unexplored concept and critcal one at that). Control of their inmates is top priority.
Foucaldian analysis is used to explicate the circumstances of the above in an acount that will both disturb and enlighten and once again make angry any who are concerned for this group.