So-called Terps- Sending Deaf PPL to Hell

I moved to a new big city a few months ago. So I've been looking for a chruch with interpreted services -or at least, a church who is willing to provide intepreters. I've called over 50 (at least) churches.

Here's my problem...for the churches that have interpreted services - the interpreters are not really interpreters - they are people who "know some sign language." Now I'm talking about HUGE churches that should be financially able to provide certified interpreters. So far all of them said they will not provide one (when I asked). A few said, "Sorry - we don't have a deaf ministry" - as if they must have one to get an interpreter.

Why is it that when it comes to medical situations and legal situations, it is generally agreed that the interpreter should be certified and qualified. However, for church situations- it seems that anyone can be "good enough." We're talking about people's SALVATION AND SOULS - preparing for the everlasting life and all that. How can the people who call themselves interpreters (when they are not) and the churches who let them do it sleep at night? If you are one of the people "who can sign some" and acting as an interpreter - it is possible you are helping to send Deaf people to Hell since they are not getting the full access to the message. Believe me - you're not doing us any favors. As long as there are people who will do "some signing," many churches are not going to invest the time and money to make sure good interpreters are being provided. I'm sorry if I sound ungrateful - but the bottom line is, I have the right to a FULL access to God's Word - and I have the right to make sure I'm getting the full message to ensure my salvation and ticket to Heaven. So-called terps - stop risking sending Deaf people to Hell - because your interpreting skills just might not be as good as you think.

Have you tried to contact deaf people in that city? They might have some information on which churches have interpreters or deaf services.

But I find it strange for a big city to not have this type of services. Even my small town have interpreters volunteering to give their services and about 45 minutes from my town there's a deaf priest (or something) in one of church.

I am curious as of what is others' opinions on this info you have brought up.

I agree churches wishing to serve all its members should provide access and accommodations for even one member who needs it.

I'm no lawyer, but I'm thinking unless the church is somehow receiving federal funds, the Persons with Disabilities Act cannot be legally applied. No matter, I still believe it would be a moral duty.

When I go to my friend's Protestant services at Salem First Christian, they offer a variety of electronic devices for HoH. My friend has been told that if they know in advance when I'll attend, even though I'm not a member, they will hire an interpreter. So the church that says it "doesn't have a deaf ministry" seems very weak in godly principles.

Regular Catholic Mass at Albany's St. Mary's is less of a problem, as the service is printed word-for-word in English and Spanish in missals in each pew. Announcements and prayer lists are also handed out.

Just a reminder: You don't go to Hell for someone else's failure or misdeeds. Even a believer's own misdeeds are forgiven if he or she wants.

Still, I hope your church will work to improve your comfort level.

First, (I mean this from a christian point of view, which I do not subscribe to) biblically, having "full access" to a preacher's words isn't what you need to enter Heaven- simply faith in Jesus as your saviour. Not fully understanding the preacher shouldn't impact this, because you can still study religious text on your own time.

I've visited churches (and countless other places of worship) for many reasons, and I've had little trouble with interpreting. I just call ahead in advance, and they'll usually do Whatever It Takes to find a suitable DB interpreter. I've had a few places with little understanding of disability issues, but all have tried to learn and make it happen so I could attend in the next week or two.

If you have trouble with the church you're trying to attend, find a new one! There are several directories which you can google for churches that DO have deaf ministries.

deafbajagal said:

I moved to a new big city a few months ago. So I've been looking for a chruch with interpreted services -or at least, a church who is willing to provide intepreters. I've called over 50 (at least) churches.

Click to expand...

I'm so sorry that you're having such a difficult time finding a good church with interpreted services and/or Deaf ministry.

Here's my problem...for the churches that have interpreted services - the interpreters are not really interpreters - they are people who "know some sign language."

Click to expand...

That is a very sorry situation. It is something that I've been "campaigning" about for many years. I interpret at my church, Sunday and Wednesday evening services, Sunday School, and whatever special meetings that happen during the week (such as revival or evangelistic services). Another couple do the Sunday morning church services. I've also visited other churches, locally and in other states, to observe their interpreted church services. So I know what you're talking about.

The sad truth is that many church "interpreters" have the right "heart" but not the right skills. I believe both aspects are important. It's to our (meaning Christian) shame that we don't require professionalism in church interpreters. I can't go into it all now (I could write a book) but suffice it to say that it is truly a shame, and it needs to be fixed.

Now I'm talking about HUGE churches that should be financially able to provide certified interpreters. So far all of them said they will not provide one (when I asked). A few said, "Sorry - we don't have a deaf ministry" - as if they must have one to get an interpreter.

Click to expand...

Many churches don't understand the difference between a Deaf ministry and an interpreted church service. They aren't the same. A good Deaf ministry includes not just hearing interpreters and Deaf church members, but also Deaf ministers and workers, specialized Sunday School and Bible study classes, and ministry fellowships and activities. An interpreted church service is just that; a church service with an interpreter.

At our church we have a Deaf ministry but because of move-aways and other situations we currently do only church service interpreting and occasional Sunday School interpreting.

I know of a couple other churches in our area that hire terps for services, and some others who have real Deaf ministries headed by Deaf people. One has an ordained Deaf minister.

In other locations (Michigan, AZ, Long Island, upstate SC) I know some other good Deaf ministries. So, they are out there; just too far and few between.

Why is it that when it comes to medical situations and legal situations, it is generally agreed that the interpreter should be certified and qualified. However, for church situations- it seems that anyone can be "good enough."

Click to expand...

Legally, church terps don't need to be certified or qualified.

Ethically, I believe church terps should at least be qualified and behave in a professional manner. They should also get equal support from the churches the same as other church ministries (music, children's, Spanish, etc.)

One problem is leverage. Professional community terps are paid for their time and services. The hiring agents can make demands on them for certification, and professional standards. Many church interpreters (at least in independent Baptist churches) are volunteers. If they are pressed to get training on their own dime, or follow stricter standards, they just quit. There's no financial incentive.

Of course that is a wrong attitude. But there are some church terps with the right attitude but just can't afford the training for themselves. That's difficult but can be overcome with good mentoring and church sponsored workshops.

The big problem is church terps who believe a two-week crash course in signing and a "good heart" are enough. If they think that they know enough and refuse training even when it's offered for free, then that's a soul problem that only the Holy Spirit can correct.

We're talking about people's SALVATION AND SOULS - preparing for the everlasting life and all that. How can the people who call themselves interpreters (when they are not) and the churches who let them do it sleep at night?

Click to expand...

Good question. Some of it is ignorance or getting information from outdated sources. Some of it is, "We've done it this way for 60 years, and we ain't changin'" attitude. Some church people still have a too paternalistic attitude.

Those are excuses, and they are unacceptable, to me.

If you are one of the people "who can sign some" and acting as an interpreter - it is possible you are helping to send Deaf people to Hell since they are not getting the full access to the message.

Click to expand...

That is something that scares me. I believe that church interpreting should be done at the highest level of skill and integrity--it is MOST important.

I don't believe that lousy interpreting will send Deaf people to Hell. We are each and all destined for Hell if we don't personally repent and accept Jesus Christ as Savior. But if Deaf people don't get a clear presentation of the Gospel, how can they know about Jesus?

Romans 10
12 For there is no difference between the Jew and the Greek: for the same Lord over all is rich unto all that call upon him. 13 For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved. 14 How then shall they call on him in whom they have not believed? and how shall they believe in him of whom they have not heard? and how shall they hear without a preacher?

My paraphrase:

For there is no difference between the hearing and the Deaf: for the same Lord over all is rich unto all that call upon him. For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved. How then shall they call on him in whom they have not believed? and how shall they believe in him of whom they have not heard? and how shall they hear without a preacher? and how shall they understand the preacher without an interpreter?

Churches are non-profit. They are exempt from ADA.

I suggest you set up a meeting with the pastor or a church group and discuss it further. Making a simple request doesn't always mean you will get it.

VamPyroX said:

Churches are non-profit. They are exempt from ADA.

I suggest you set up a meeting with the pastor or a church group and discuss it further. Making a simple request doesn't always mean you will get it.

Click to expand...

I guess you didn't see where this person said she has contacted at least 50 churches so far and didn't mention anything about violation of the ADA.

the phrase "secure my ticket to heaven" has got to be by far, the best quote EVER

Chase said:

I agree churches wishing to serve all its members should provide access and accommodations for even one member who needs it.

I'm no lawyer, but I'm thinking unless the church is somehow receiving federal funds, the Persons with Disabilities Act cannot be legally applied. No matter, I still believe it would be a moral duty.

When I go to my friend's Protestant services at Salem First Christian, they offer a variety of electronic devices for HoH. My friend has been told that if they know in advance when I'll attend, even though I'm not a member, they will hire an interpreter. So the church that says it "doesn't have a deaf ministry" seems very weak in godly principles.

Regular Catholic Mass at Albany's St. Mary's is less of a problem, as the service is printed word-for-word in English and Spanish in missals in each pew. Announcements and prayer lists are also handed out.

Just a reminder: You don't go to Hell for someone else's failure or misdeeds. Even a believer's own misdeeds are forgiven if he or she wants.

Still, I hope your church will work to improve your comfort level.

Click to expand...

You are correct re: the ADA. In the case of religious services, providing a terp becomes a moral issue rather than a legal one. I find it ironic, expecially given the fact that deaf education in this was founded on on the concept of salvation.

First of all, let me say that I am not a church interpreter. I am fully certified (CI/CT) and I interpret professionally, but I will not interpret in church because I don't understand it. I am an atheist, I'm not familiar with any religion's practice (or their signs!), so I just don't do church interpreting. I would be providing a disservice to the deaf congregants by trying to interpret in their church.

You've brought up two issues. First, you are complaining that many churches don't or won't provide an interpreter. No argument from me here, but I think the burden is on you to push the issue. Have you explained what a qualified interpreter is, and why you feel they need one? Or have you just called 50 churches and gotten answers like "we have somebody who signs" and not pressed the issue? It's unfortunate that more people don't understand the importance of qualified interpreters, but the information isn't out there for them, so it is the deaf person's job to inform them what "qualified" means.

The second issue is that poor interpreters are denying deaf people full access to services. Well, yes. No arguments there either. And yes, the "signers" should know better...whoever taught them sign language should have informed them of the importance of using a qualified interpreter, and not "interpreting" if you don't know how. But many of them just want to help the best way they can, so they provide inadequate services because "it's better than nothing."

Perhaps instead of phrasing it as "bad interpreters send deaf people to hell" you could phrase it as "bad interpreters don't do enough to keep deaf people from hell." It's not like the interpreter is willfully sending someone to hell. They don't withhold their excellent interpreting skills so that a deaf person will go to hell. They just don't have the skills in the first place, and that is not a crime. Yes, they should know better, but they are NOT deliberately sending anyone anywhere as you suggest. In fact, I would bet that they sleep just fine, knowing that they are providing some access.

Have you looked at churches who use PPT and "proxima" display for sermon, song, prayer etc?

I am sorry that this is happening to u. I hope u will get this resolved soon.

My friend in PA is having the same problem as u are. She hasnt gone to church in a year cuz of her situation with the interpreter.

I would talk to the Pastor of the church and ask him to provide a decent qualified interpreter for you. If he doesn't then he is not being a good pastor by not delivering the word of God to all people.

loml said:

Have you looked at churches who use PPT and "proxima" display for sermon, song, prayer etc?

Click to expand...

Is PPT for Power Point? Proxima is overhead projection? Do some churches use those for Deaf members instead of interpreters?

Reba said:

Is PPT for Power Point? Proxima is overhead projection? Do some churches use those for Deaf members instead of interpreters?

Click to expand...

But wouldn't that be transliteration (spoken English to written English) and not interpretation? That's what I was thinking when I read loml's post, but you beat me to the reply. isomeone is requesting interpretation, it doesn't necessarily follow that transliteration serves the same purpose!

jillio said:

But wouldn't that be transliteration (spoken English to written English) and not interpretation? That's what I was thinking when I read loml's post, but you beat me to the reply. isomeone is requesting interpretation, it doesn't necessarily follow that transliteration serves the same purpose!

Click to expand...

It could be transliteration if it is a Power Point Presentation of the sermon.

jillio said:

But wouldn't that be transliteration (spoken English to written English) and not interpretation? That's what I was thinking when I read loml's post, but you beat me to the reply. isomeone is requesting interpretation, it doesn't necessarily follow that transliteration serves the same purpose!

Click to expand...

That might suit some people, especially oral non-signing or late-deafened adults. But if a Deaf member or visitor wants real interpretation then a printed version of what's happening isn't going to suffice. I have interpreted for many people in various settings who would get almost zero from a transcribed service. It's like the doctor who thinks writing notes is adequate communication for a Deaf patient. It just doesn't cut it for everyone.

Reba said:

That might suit some people, especially oral non-signing or late-deafened adults. But if a Deaf member or visitor wants real interpretation then a printed version of what's happening isn't going to suffice. I have interpreted for many people in various settings who would get almost zero from a transcribed service. It's like the doctor who thinks writing notes is adequate communication for a Deaf patient. It just doesn't cut it for everyone.

Click to expand...

**nodding agreement**

Reba

I have interpreted for many people in various settings who would get almost zero from a transcribed service

Click to expand...

reba - Why?

Reba said:

Is PPT for Power Point? Proxima is overhead projection? Do some churches use those for Deaf members instead of interpreters?

Click to expand...

Reba - I have seen PPT and proxima used for sermons. Is it used instead of interpreters? I honestly cannot answer that.